| ▲ | jakubmazanec 6 hours ago | |||||||||||||
I'm not arguing against the core arguments of the article (I agree with most of the points), but on the other hand, software development is (at least currently) an essentially iterative process - one that differs greatly from other production processes (e.g. buildings, cars). We all know how difficult it is to estimate how much development time something takes. Planning is hard and outcomes have therefore greater variability. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Bayramovanar 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
I generally agree with you, but if you look deeper, cars, buildings, and the underlying know-how didn’t appear in a day either. Those were also iterative processes: first tires and mud houses, then horse carriages and brick houses, and eventually cars and buildings. In that sense, it’s not fundamentally different from engineering today. Working on core engineering functionality of a company is essentially the same kind of process. The difference lies in whether you’re working on core functionality, or on some iterative experiment that nobody knows will succeed. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | noosphr 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Your aren't building a car when you are writing software, you are building a car factory. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | insane_dreamer an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
The other major factor is that increasing dev work for "side bets" doesn't require large Capex investments which typically other industries do (building a new car as a moonshot project? you have to spin up a whole new factory). all you need is some office space and not even that if you're hiring remote | ||||||||||||||