I mean these numbers are just made up anyways, so why are engineers concerned with them? The idea of engineers needing to justify monetary value is just... ill conceived. They should be concerned with engineering problems. Let the engineering manager worry about the imaginary money numbers.

  > User retention is a thing.

Problem is no one needs to care about the product's quality if the product has the market cornered... Even less of a concern if the users don't know how to pick good products from bad products. Tech illiteracy directly leads to Lemon Markets

▲ TeMPOraL 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I mean these numbers are just made up anyways, so why are engineers concerned with them?

That's what they're directly or indirectly being graded on. Even if they don't have to show how their work impacted the company's bottom line, their managers or their managers' managers have to, and poop just rolls downhill.

> The idea of engineers needing to justify monetary value is just... ill conceived. They should be concerned with engineering problems. Let the engineering manager worry about the imaginary money numbers.

If this was only possible in this industry. If you're in a small company, you're wearing multiple hats anyway. If you're in a big corp, well, my wife hates that I see this in everything, but - hidden inflation is a thing. As roles are eliminated (er, "streamlined"), everyone is forced to be responsible for things they're not really supposed to care about (my favorite example is filing expense reports).

As you aptly put it upthread: we fucked up...

▲ godelski 3 days ago | parent [-]

  > That's what they're directly or indirectly being graded on.

I think you'd agree that this should have never been the case. Engineering managers or project managers, sure. But engineers? That's just silly.

We need firewalls. One group's primary concern needs to be on the product. Another group's primary concern needs to be on keeping the business alive and profitable.

Too much of the former and you fail to prioritize the right work. Too much of the latter and you build vaporware. The downsides of biasing in one direction is certainly worse than the other...

  > my wife hates that I see this in everything, but - hidden inflation is a thing.

Lol, your wife might have a field day with mine...

I have a fundamental belief that there's far more complexity than we let on. That as we advance complexity only increases. What was once rounding errors end up becoming major roadblocks. It's the double edged nature of success: the more you improve the harder it is to improve. I truly will never understand how everyone (including niche experts) thinks things are so simple.

But my partner is doing her PhD in economics, so she also thinks about opportunity costs quite a lot but I think she (and a lot of her friends) were quite unaware of how a lot of stuff operates in tech[0].

Probably doesn't help that, as you know, I'm not great at brevity :/

[0] My favorite thing to at her department get togethers (alcohol is always involved) is to introduce them to open source software. Quite a number of them find it difficult to understand how much of the world is based on this type of work and how little money it makes. Not to mention the motivations behind it. The xz hack led to some interesting discussions...

▲

elcritch 3 days ago | parent [-]

Perhaps it's because I've been in tech for so long, but I can't comprehend PhD candidates not knowing about open source software.

	▲	godelski 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		PhD Economists, not PhD Computer Scientists. Don't worry, people didn't go completely brain dead lol. And most of the economists know about it but not the scale or how it fits in the larger ecosystem. They really just know it as "there's sometimes tools on GitHub".

▲ cindyllm 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]