Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#111

Post by reallydude » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 5:50 PM UTC

wutbrodo wrote: post #109

reallydude wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't the implication. The issue is an hypocritical assertion. If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. The fact these views live in the same comment, is ironic. ie > I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad stroke > a l…

> If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. I think this is the logical leap that people aren't understanding. Generalizing means assuming things about individuals based on their group membership: OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing, but that it leads to inac…

> OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing

The morality and intent is irrelevant to my core assertion. A criticism of contravariance (if that makes it clearer) followed by a usage of it is unexpected hypocrisy, which is ironic.

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#112

Post by erikpukinskis » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 5:54 PM UTC

I don't want to get into the specifics of what makes Scrum good or bad. But one thing I have noticed working in software is that 99% of people who talk about Scrum actually have not spent any real time learning it. Not the product people, not the managers, and not the engineers.

Anyway, I don't want to get into the weeds, but if anyone is interested I just posted a gist of all my notes I took while reading every Scrum document I could find a few months ago: https://gist.github.com/erikpukinskis/a8a61b8fbd19f8063737f7...

There's a lot to it, as a software engineer, learning more about it was actually pretty exciting for me because there are some good ideas in there for some of the standard headaches I see over and over in software companies.

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#113

Post by kbrisso » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

ericmcer wrote: post #104

js2 wrote: post #29

> This type of innovation takes significant up-front design time, and working on components over longer than one week iterations. Because the projects have such simple external interfaces, and so much internal complexity, much of the work is not even visible to “customers”, so there is no way to write customer visible stories about it. This type of software takes 8–20 months to deliver the first working version to th…

The engineers who I have seen game these systems inspire a mix of anger, jealousy and admiration. I can never decide if those of us working hard and trying to make things better are dumb or if the people exploiting company policies are. I watched a new hire recently lynchpin himself into a critical part of the software, make larger then life promises about new “cutting edge” tech in presentations, constantly post art…

Where I work this is an "Architect". I'm in the middle of a project designed by these same people to use these "new cutting edge technologies" we are essentially replacing one legacy pile of shit for another new pile of shit that is ever more so complicated to maintain. It blows my mind the money that it being wasted.

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#114

Post by solidasparagus » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 5:57 PM UTC

Udik wrote: post #57

malvosenior wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For someone who doesn't want to be painted in broad strokes, it seems like a very broad brush to paint non-Googlers with.

Who said that Googlers are not part of those "masses"? Surely they enjoy products from their company as anybody else? And then, of course, nobody said you're part of those masses anyway. Maybe you're not. Do you enjoy Google product X as other hundreds of million do? Then you're part of the mass that enjoys it. Otherwise you are part of the mass that doesn't.

'The masses' refers to the lower classes (look at any dictionary and how the word has historically been used - 'opiate of the masses', 'the unwashed masses'). It would not typically be correct to say that a Googler is part of the lower classer. 'The masses' is definitely not the same as 'everyone'.

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#115

Post by hinkley » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:02 PM UTC

The hardest part of working with really smart people is that they can rationalize pretty much anything. Worse still, if they have been on the project for years and you’re the new guy, you’re working from a deficit of knowledge and they’ve had plenty of time to cook up a “coherent but wrong” model of the universe. The only thing that saves a group like that is humility. Trying to see the system through the eyes of the new person helps loads. I call people out for complaining about “having to” train a new guy. It’s “getting to”, man. Take advantage of the opportunity.

The first time I worked with a stable group where everyone was a smart as me, even the old new guy with a massive inferiority complex who managed to sneak one really profound comment into every meeting, there was a lack of humility on everybody’s part and things did not go well. Planning meetings were exhausting because you could get them to bash their own old work but couldn’t get them to admit to needing to change process at all. I should have quit, but I had a string of experiences with persistence paying off and I had not been beaten yet. That was the first time, and my current employer the second (I should probably quit here, too).

Cognitive dissonance is at its absolute worst in the head of a scary-smart person.

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#116

Post by tomc1985 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:03 PM UTC

wutbrodo wrote: post #106

malvosenior wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of irony in saying that about "developers at Google" and then immediately turning around and classifying everyone else as "the masses". Talk about broad strokes!

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I see any connection between generalizing about every member of a group, and using the term masses.

It's an overzealous interpretation of a common manner of speech. Muckrakers...

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#117

Post by tomc1985 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:04 PM UTC

solidasparagus wrote: post #59

caconym_ wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "the masses" offensive?

It's a phrase that tends to be used by people who consider themselves superior to 'the masses'. The phrase refers specifically to the lower-classes or those outside of elite circles[1]. Combined with Google's reputation of quiet arrogance[2], it's a phrase that I would have avoided. [1] Pick a dictionary and you will find references to lower-classes, the not-elite or the common people. https://www.merriam-webster.com…

You should probably chill with that. It's used by all sorts of people and does not reflect their feelings towards "the masses"

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#118

Post by tomc1985 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:05 PM UTC

solidasparagus wrote: post #114

Udik wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said that Googlers are not part of those "masses"? Surely they enjoy products from their company as anybody else? And then, of course, nobody said you're part of those masses anyway. Maybe you're not. Do you enjoy Google product X as other hundreds of million do? Then you're part of the mass that enjoys it. Otherwise you are part of the mass that doesn't.

'The masses' refers to the lower classes (look at any dictionary and how the word has historically been used - 'opiate of the masses', 'the unwashed masses'). It would not typically be correct to say that a Googler is part of the lower classer. 'The masses' is definitely not the same as 'everyone'.

In your negative case you're using modifier words to change the meaning of "masses". Besides, why be part of the PC police??

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#119

Post by dodobirdlord » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:07 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #61

ben509 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When human beings are part of an association that is verifiably elite, it is quite common for them to have elitist attitudes.

Elite in compensation, true. But is the average Googler contributing more to humanity than the average teacher? I'm not so sure.

From the 2018 shareholder's letter, Google created $335 billion in economic activity in 2018.[0] From the 2019 Q2 financial results, Google has 107,646 employees. By raw division the average Google employee creates $3,112,052 in economic global activity each year.

[0] https://abc.xyz/investor/founders-letters/2018/ [1] https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2019Q2_alphabet_earnings...

Re: Why do developers at Google consider Agile development to be nonsense? (2016)

#120

Post by eklavya » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 6:09 PM UTC

I am sometimes amazed by our industry. Somebody comes up with a solution to a problem and then someone else starts applying it before they even have a problem. Sometimes people ignore what mistakes/challenges others have dealt with and win/lose their own battles. So many times, people just say X does/uses it as some kind of validation or guidance. Well, if your business is also like X, great, you are learning from other people doing the same thing. Otherwise why are you looking at X and not "your" challenges, resources and opportunities?

There is just too much religion here :)

If you need it use it, if it works, great, if it doesn't or you don't need it, move on. The only advice I would give to people is that there is no rule book or the good way. Use your brain and pick up things that work.