I'm a big fan of this explanation/rant from Andrew Murphy.
-
The fact that we are *not* seeing wildly improving software all around us tells us everything we need to know.
There is no flourishing of value delivery, new product categories, more needs being satisfied better. It’s the opposite.
All we are seeing is decreases in quality, because
code
creation
is not
the problem.@elizayer i think about this. according to the promises, all the little snags and bugs and oversights in all the software i use should be gone by now. "everyone's focusing on bigger things" doesn't excuse it, i was given the expectation these types of fixes should have been trivial and quick. computing should be better than ever, or at least as good as it was in the 2010s
-
-
I'm a big fan of this explanation/rant from Andrew Murphy.
Taken as a whole, there are many bottlenecks in a corporate software development process. The "load-bearing" calendar is a great example!
Speeding up code creation just increases pressure on the bottleneck, which decreases throughput.
-
Absolutely:
"More code, less understanding. That's not a productivity gain. That's a time bomb with a nicer dashboard." -
The fact that we are *not* seeing wildly improving software all around us tells us everything we need to know.
There is no flourishing of value delivery, new product categories, more needs being satisfied better. It’s the opposite.
All we are seeing is decreases in quality, because
code
creation
is not
the problem. -
I'm a big fan of this explanation/rant from Andrew Murphy.
Taken as a whole, there are many bottlenecks in a corporate software development process. The "load-bearing" calendar is a great example!
Speeding up code creation just increases pressure on the bottleneck, which decreases throughput.
@elizayer I've listened to a few podcasts now where software company executives (and even a CEO, who I would have expected to know better because he's a CEO) have talked about how much faster their teams are producing code, and since their QA teams can't keep up they've fired those people and are using Claude for QA now.
I get that devs don't study management subjects (I was one myself, many years ago) so they won't necessarily know how to find and fix bottlenecks, but I'm genuinely disappointed that software industry executives don't realise they're in a manufacturing business, nor do they understand how to optimise their value chains.
I know it's a cliche to say that people fail upwards, and I've worked with many executives who were clearly in their roles because they were intelligent, educated, and were delivering at a strategic level - but I'm beginning to wonder if software businesses are a special case.
-
The fact that we are *not* seeing wildly improving software all around us tells us everything we need to know.
There is no flourishing of value delivery, new product categories, more needs being satisfied better. It’s the opposite.
All we are seeing is decreases in quality, because
code
creation
is not
the problem.@elizayer
Almost all of the code written by the major software companies since the late 80’s has been bloatware. Especially operating systems. The days when programming was an art and minimizing resource usage was the primary consideration are long gone. If that code is what AI and these LLM’s are being “trained” on then expect software to continue its downward spiral. -
I'm a big fan of this explanation/rant from Andrew Murphy.
Taken as a whole, there are many bottlenecks in a corporate software development process. The "load-bearing" calendar is a great example!
Speeding up code creation just increases pressure on the bottleneck, which decreases throughput.
-
@Niall @beep @elizayer Germans have a word for accessible cars. it translates as "low floor bus". Sorry, there's no English language version of that article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niederflurtechnik
Of course, there are people whose disability doesn't allow them to take a bus, those will need a driving service.
Also, driverless subways make a lot more sense than driverless cars, because you have a much more controlled environment.
-
The good news is :
Open source maintainers see an increase in the quality of AI security tools, it will soon be in the hands of the bad actors.
Then it will be mandatory to do good software and ( i will make the leap of faith that ) you have to understand the business needs to create a simple software that handle the issues.
-
@elizayer to be 100% completely super fair, we are seeing a massive increase in scams. So AI is good for something. Scams. It’s good for scams.
-
The fact that we are *not* seeing wildly improving software all around us tells us everything we need to know.
There is no flourishing of value delivery, new product categories, more needs being satisfied better. It’s the opposite.
All we are seeing is decreases in quality, because
code
creation
is not
the problem.@elizayer@mastodon.social Claude Code found a 23-year-old Linux vulnerability, the kind a regular human security auditor would have taken weeks or months to find (or in this case, 23 years). https://mtlynch.io/claude-code-found-linux-vulnerability/
-
M monkee@other.li shared this topic
