41–50 of 150 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because agile has been so successful, right? ;)
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because waterfall software engineering has been so successful, right? ;-)
Because agile has been so successful, right? ;)
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.
I think the antidote is ownership. Every part of a company or product needs some person or small group that owns it, understands it, and feels ownership over its long-term health. They review or decide what level of review changes to it can take. So much of what makes high-functioning teams work is a sense of ownership and stewardship, and what makes low-functioning teams break is a lack thereof. Someone with pride,…
Wait...
I think the antidote is ownership. Every part of a company or product needs some person or small group that owns it, understands it, and feels ownership over its long-term health. They review or decide what level of review changes to it can take. So much of what makes high-functioning teams work is a sense of ownership and stewardship, and what makes low-functioning teams break is a lack thereof. Someone with pride,…
I've said this before, but people gloss over this fact.
>Someone with pride, drive, and a high standard feeling responsible for a particular area or thing.
I've also said this before, but AI-glazers just respond with "I think we may just have to let go of pride & kudos and their connection to our identity."
Most people who vibecode don't give a shit about their work. Any solution is a solution as long as it works.
>This might feel like gatekeeping, but it's the only way.
Gatekeeping is not inherently bad. We want gatekeeping.
If I'm getting surgery, I want an actual doctor with proven credentials to do it.
And to anyone claiming that software doesn't kill, please look up "Therac-25" or the 65 people that died due to Tesla's "Full Self-Driving".
My primary editor is vim, and for a significant amount of time I was using it almost in puritan fashion, this was before LLM was mainstream.
However, I could not use vim to edit java, even with language server - I tried, but each time I went back to intellij - the rest of the code base in python, ruby and typescript was typically fine.
The reason was two fold, because everyone was using all of the features that intellij had to offer, the code was structured similar to intellij and obviously the java design patterns that was popular at the time. Everything went through factories and managers and interfaces and tracking them through a pure editor was almost impossible. The IDE handled it for you.
But everything else? Things I or others had to build from ground up was built with this cognitive limitation in mind, which means I can fit everything nicely and edit with vim, even without a language server with high efficiency.
Those cognitive limitation is good for the software. It's easy to explain, easy to debug, easy to add and subtract. And I've come to disregard the intellij way, or the current vibe coding till it works that is common everywhere now. The principle is KISS - keep it simple stupid. If AI will not do that, then you have to. It is a simple philosophical question that is more important than ever. And sadly most people still don't realize it - they will happily tack on the next "feature" in with the scaling they didn't need at that time with the design pattern that they don't need at the time and prematurely optimize themselves into cognitive and technical bankruptcy.
These sorts of articles just seem silly to me. Use AI where it helps you and avoid where it doesn't. That dividing line may change week to week. I think it's great for writing tests and sanity checking changes but wouldn't let it write core driver code(I'm a systems programmer so YMMV). Maybe in a month I'll think differently.
Using a tool as a tool is hard when the market is telling you to use it in everything as if it’s the new sliced bread.
Was this article written by AI?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, stay with me here, the LLMs were trained on how we, statistically, write.
Anytime I see “this is not just x, it’s y” i can almost guarantee with high degree of confidence that slop was used.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How so? Could you give some specific examples?
My experience moving between startup/SME/corp: Smaller teams have more agency to move and usually team members with broader responsibility and understanding of the systems. Also possibly closer to stakeholders, so are already involved in specification creation and know where automation can add value. Add an AI agent and they can pick and choose where they can be most effective at a system level. Bigger teams have cle…
Not every company is going to see those boundaries and stakeholders as features, and they'll be under pressure to "mitigate those blockers to execution". That's where the cognitive debt skyrockets.