Live data from Hacker News

What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

margaretstorey.com

101–110 of 150 posts

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#101

I may get downvoted for this but I don't agree that demand for software guys will drop. What I think is, demand for software people will go up while wages will be suppressed. And more software will be in the market as a whole. There are so many craftsmen in market who hardly make liveable wage, select few make a bank! Same pattern will repeat in software. Mass market software with large-scale adoption will drop. And…

>I always believe software wages shouldn't be more than a plumber or mechanic.

Wages in the trades have gone up a lot recently, at least where I'm from. Decades of parents telling their kids the trades are for losers lowering the supply of capable craftsmen...

And not all software will work as specialized tooling.

Calorie tracker apps? Sure.

Operating system kernels? Each with their own schedulers and allocators and ABIs and syscalls? Definitely not.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#102
I'm currently working on a large project that was started by a 3rd-party vendor, then dumped onto the in-house team's lap due to an unforeseen financial pinch.

The vendor was basically right at the end of the "fun" part of cranking out features, and just about to hit the "rubber meets the road" part where you start fixing bugs, finding new edge cases, discovering new hidden requirements, and realizing X% of your design assumptions were completely wrong. Oh yeah, and minor little mop-up tasks that don't wow the client, like integrating with a payment processor, integrating with our internal scheduling system, exporting invitee lists from our CRM into our app, etc.

It's possible we're in a similar cognitive debt situation to having to maintain a large, swiftly-AI-coded app. After about 6 months of stressful development, which started with what I call throwing dye in the water and eventually progressed to understanding one small feature or flow at a time, we have maybe 50% of the mental model we'd have if we'd built the app ourselves. Whole chunks of the app are still a black box to us.

It doesn't help that requirements have evolved so much since the original documentation that it's worse than useless because we can't trust it. So the code, which we don't understand, is the only documentation of the current requirements.

Of course, our internal clients are pissed because the final product is taking so much longer than expected, when they could see all these awesome shiny, happy-path, 80%-done features 6 months ago. We're in a constant fire drill. Everyone on the project is miserable. It's the least fun kind of development.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#103
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because agile has been so successful, right? ;)

In fact, agile has been extremely successful. It's the people that claim to "do agile" that invariably don't do it. But software development used to fail most of the time, and it doesn't do that anymore.

Hmm that reminds me of what some people say about communism :)

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#104
post #45

Was this article written by AI?

bidirectional inverted commas, negative parallelism, short punchy prose, dot point listing ... these language techniques are consistently present throughout. whether this article was written by AI or not, its structure and style utterly screams of AI.

But which was the first, the chicken or the egg?

The LLMs have been trained on soulless corporate speak.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#105
To me, the cognitive debt incurred by Agentic AI described here is not so different from the cognitive debt incurred by code written by someone else. Even when you are the reviewer of your colleague’s code, you can’t just grok everything as if the code were written by you. What more to say if you are not even the reviewer.

And that’s okay! Much like it’s okay to let other people write the code.

What is important is that the code written by Agentic AI is covered by automated tests adequately, and that you verify that the architectural plan is solid. But then this is also what you do with your colleagues’/juniors’ code.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#106

Unfortunately I think Cognitive Debt is the cry of the software craftsperson who thought they were an Engineer. Upon working with the agent subcontractor, the agent factory, the agent part vendor, they approached it as a craft; they found themselves wanting to walk through the offices of the subcontractor reviewing screens, inspect pieces at the factory, and get the internal design for the parts they ordered. It's na…

Because waterfall software engineering has been so successful, right? ;-)

As if anything in the world is ever pure. Waterfall can have small scrums run on side-shows, while staying waterfally on the center project.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#107
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because agile has been so successful, right? ;)

In fact, agile has been extremely successful. It's the people that claim to "do agile" that invariably don't do it. But software development used to fail most of the time, and it doesn't do that anymore.

They cloned one true scottsmann in the end..

If the idea does not compute with human nature, the idea is flawed, its basis the knowledge of human nature is non-existent and thus it had no place in reality after all..

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agile fails when folks don't adjust and tailor the process to the specific needs of their team or organization but instead try to cargo cult it.

so it's called agile when it works, but not when it doesn't, got it!

No, “it’s” adaptive and if you’re not adaptive then you’re quite literally not doing “it”.

Adaptive methods aren’t something unique to Agile, it’s an aspect found in basic business methodologies and processes. Very basic, textbook stuff. So when software types start grumping about their dysfunctional organizations and blaming methods they aren’t actually applying, it isn’t an indictment of the method and never can be.

If “Adaptive Heat Cycle 3.5” is a process where we turn down the thermostat when we’re too hot, and up when we’re too cold, based on a vote every 20 min: a bunch of sweaty people who are not voting and not changing the temp and lying about their needs because their boss sucks are not using the process. The fact they claim they are is only further proof of dysfunction and incompetence.

Agile has a built in solution to all agile complaints: the agile process where you fix the problem. No fix? Not agile. Blame the cargo cult players, not the rules.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You gotta understand how to use a tool for it to be effective, yes.

And if a tool is that difficult to use, how can you tell if the problem is in the tool or the user? There's a large industry built around doing training and certifications in agile methodologies now. If a tool is that difficult to get right, maybe it's just not a good tool to begin with. To be fair, the manifesto and methodology is quite good in theory. But I just have never heard of(or experienced) it working proper…

So the widespread existence of business programs, certification and training heavy, obviously proves every project and business methodology is “bad” and the problem is the tool of “business methodologies”?

PRINCE2, for example, is constantly fumbled and misunderstood by immature juniors. They don’t get it, and screw it up. So… what? Haphazard planning and last minute project detonations must replace any effort to avoid such outcomes?

It’s chicken and egg. You have screwups who can’t manage and think wrong, so you formalize rules so dummies can’t hurt leadership, and then you have to train people. A stunning number fail to ‘get it’, suck at management, and do what they feel with justifications instead of following the book. That’s standard distribution at play.

Blaming methods for basic management failures is a management and culture failure. “I’ve never seen [agile] implemented correctly” is saying you didn’t fix communication issues. That’s fine, that’s hard. But that’s a meatspace issue, not process.

Re: What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)

#110

Unfortunately I think Cognitive Debt is the cry of the software craftsperson who thought they were an Engineer. Upon working with the agent subcontractor, the agent factory, the agent part vendor, they approached it as a craft; they found themselves wanting to walk through the offices of the subcontractor reviewing screens, inspect pieces at the factory, and get the internal design for the parts they ordered. It's na…

> this is why Engineers have contracts, specifications, design drawings, datasheets, and characterization data, handed over at clearly defined boundaries of abstraction

AND inspecting the actual production line. Even Apple audits Foxconn (the most successful and reliable assembly line humans ever built) onsite annually.

Post reply on HN