This is a great article and more people should read it. I was wondering why the sentences sound so familiar and it turns out it's heavily plagiarised (as in, a substantial number of sentences and paragraphs are lifted verbatim from) Gerald Weinberg's book The Psychology of Computer Programming (listed at the end as one of the "references"). Read this book; much of it is still very applicable decades later (and the ex…
I think by definition if it's heavily plagiarized another source it's not a great article.
In fact given what I can tell of the author(s) in this case, we should be grateful it's so heavily plagiarized; the less they plagiarized (and the more they inserted their own content), it seems the worse it would be. :-)
----------------------------------
BTW I took a look at the article again, and it contains solely of two paragraphs picked up verbatim from Wikipedia, followed by the remaining paragraphs each verbatim from book. The only changes I could detect were:
1. where the book mentions "Starting with the work of the social psychologist Festinger", the article has "Starting with the work of the social psychologist Leon Festinger" with a link to the Wikipedia article for him
2. the article introduces random bolding of various words
3. where the book says
> There are thousands of variations to these plaints, but the one thing we never seem to hear is a simple...
the article says (turning the correct "hear" into "here")
> There are thousands of variations to these objections, if you are interested in finding more, check out devexcuses or programmingexcuses. But the one thing we never seem to here is a simple...
Apart from that, there doesn't seem to be a single original sentence in the article.