| ▲ | setgree 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Per "Choose Boring Technology" [0]: > Let’s say every company gets about three innovation tokens. You can spend these however you want, but the supply is fixed for a long while... If you choose to write your website in NodeJS, you just spent one of your innovation tokens. If you choose to use MongoDB, you just spent one of your innovation tokens. If you choose to use service discovery tech that’s existed for a year or less, you just spent one of your innovation tokens. If you choose to write your own database, oh god, you’re in trouble. From my POV, the author spent their innovation tokens on a political commitment. I would not recommend this path to someone starting a company. It's hard enough already. Also, many American companies that might have been useful to the author were founded by Europeans, e.g. GitLab. There's plenty of European talent for making widely adopted infrastructure. If those companies aren't in Europe, it's worth asking why [1]. [0] https://mcfunley.com/choose-boring-technology [1] https://worksinprogress.co/issue/why-europe-doesnt-have-a-te... | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | vanschelven 3 hours ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
But the argument is reversed! The more boring your tech stack, the _easier_ it is to host it anywhere (including Europe). So choosing boring tech is actually an enabler of this (and other) choices down the line. It's only "a political commitment" as long as it doesn't affect you yet; and from the European perspective I'd say "the affecting has begun". | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||