The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
baldurbjarnason.com
The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
1–10 of 32 posts
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#2This is fascinating from the perspective of a strong inclination to agree with the general political thesis—that business benefits from commoditization or labor—and a strong disinclination to agree with the attribution of it to trends in software preferences.
For instance, I don’t think the component model in UI frameworks is popular because it commoditizes UI developers, but rather because professional developers seek to commoditize aspects of their own work which are rote or neatly fit an abstraction that frees them up to think about more pressing concerns. The same logic would apply to basically any layer of technology which has the same leverage… the only reason we’re discussing this one is because the agreement of its utility is slightly less than unanimous.
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#3Wow this is about as cynical as it’s possible to be about real, tangible technological progress.
I strongly disagree with the authors conclusions about the technologies and the premise.
This is truly peak HN content.
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#4[deleted]
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#5This author slams React but then doesn’t have the guts to list alternatives.
Standardized frameworks makes recruitment easier – but it stops there. Once you onboard an employee and they spend considerable time integrating into the company and developing specific knowledge, they are no longer easily replaceable. If they are a key component of the team it will be painful to replace them, it will take years to hire someone new and get them back up to that same level. It’s better to just suck it up and pay them more than endure the costs and risks of hiring new labor.
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#6Wow this is about as cynical as it’s possible to be about real, tangible technological progress. I strongly disagree with the authors conclusions about the technologies and the premise. This is truly peak HN content.
No, it can still be more cynical.
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#7I wish I could downvote this post. The examples are bad (react and electron were 100% user driven hits) and the author is frankly kind of toxic.
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#8This is fascinating from the perspective of a strong inclination to agree with the general political thesis—that business benefits from commoditization or labor—and a strong disinclination to agree with the attribution of it to trends in software preferences. For instance, I don’t think the component model in UI frameworks is popular because it commoditizes UI developers, but rather because professional developers se…
Spot on!
Re: The labour arbitrage theory of dev tool popularity
#9Wow this is about as cynical as it’s possible to be about real, tangible technological progress. I strongly disagree with the authors conclusions about the technologies and the premise. This is truly peak HN content.
This seems almost tailor-made to be HN bait.