> I mean, sure. So what does the solution look like?

Obviously taking on fewer such liabilities?

The article specifically excludes this as _the_ solution to the problem:

> I am not advocating to write things from scratch.

and is clear in its target:

> That’s my general criticism: the unnecessary automation.

Yes, fewer dependencies is a solution, but it does not seem to be the author's position.

	▲	gingerBill 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		That is my position... again, I am not sure how you got this conclusion from the article. The "I am not advocating to write things from scratch" is more of a caveat to the people I know will comment NIH nonsense rather than anything productive. But yes, my position is minimize dependencies and slow and carefully vet them too, and do not automate this process.