[amandavinci]

We don't build software like a bridge; we grow it like a garden. The industrial revolution was about building machines that dominate its environment. The software revolution is about writing code to resonate with its environment. The software grows in harmony with its user and business needs. Except, of course, for special cases such as this.

"The whole approach to developing software is intentionally designed not to rely on any particular person."

Our programming culture is not ready for this. Any programmer who identifies with their craft will never want to be another cog in the machine. A programmer could have chosen to be a doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc. but they choose to code because it is one of the way they can "express" themselves.

[NanoCoaster]

> A programmer could have chosen to be a doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc. but they choose to code because it is one of the way they can "express" themselves.

Not necessarily. I chose to code because I'm good at it and because I'm not good enough at anything else to do it as a job. Well, at least not in the same salary range.

I agree with your point otherwise but I'm not sure that people solely choose to become software developers because they wish to express themselves through their work. A lot of developers I know personally see coding as just a job. A job they like, but a job.

[bluGill]

If you put as much effort into law as you have into software you would be a good lawyer and a terrible developer. It is a choice. Today your effort learning software pays better (with exceptions both ways) then law, but historically law has been good. I decline to speculate on if law will earn better than software in the future.

You can say the same for medicine, any other engineering field, farming, ditch digging, or any other job. Regardless of which you choose some love it and some it is just a job.