[scrubs]

Nah, I don't much like the tone of this article. Not at all.

The engineering message should be: keep your architecture as simple as possible. And here are some ways (to follow) on how to find that minimal and complete size 2 outfit foundation in your size 10 hoarder-track-suite-eye-sore.

Do we really need to be preached at with a warmed over redo of `X' cut it for me as a kid so I really don't know why all the kids think their new fangled Y is better? No we don't.

If you have stateless share nothing events your architecture should be simple. Should or could you have stateless share nothing even if that's not what you have today? That's where we need to be weighing in.

Summary: less old guy whining/showing-off and more education. Thanks. From the Breakfast club kids.

[rendall]

I'm not sure why this particular author is so popular on HN, but he hits the front page regularly.

[kragen]

Because he says things that are true and less well known than they should be, and then gives a clearly written argument that shows you that they are true using logic and empirical evidence.

So far that just describes any good science paper or math textbook; the difference is that he's writing about questions of great interest to HN, like in this case "how to build a web service", "how to do software version tracking" (https://danluu.com/monorepo/), "how to do statistics" (https://danluu.com/linear-hammer/), "why hardware development is hard" (https://danluu.com/why-hardware-development-is-hard/), "why everything is broken" (https://danluu.com/nothing-works/), and "how to hire talented people" (https://danluu.com/talent/). These are topics where there is an enormous amount of hot air out there on the web, but very little that is epistemologically justifiable.

[rendall]

I don't disagree with you, but other people write on these topics more compellingly, and do not include off-putting Wolfram/Doctorow-style self regard. I chalk it up to his being astoundingly prolific.

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=danluu.com

[kragen]

Perhaps other people don't find his writing uncompelling or read Wolfram-style self-regard into it.

[rendall]

Evidently.

These two things can be true at once: Intelligent good people with good taste and good will find an author's writing compelling, interesting and valuable. Simultaneously, other intelligent good people with good taste and good will do not. It happens. Neither are wrong.

[kragen]

Yes, that is a thing that has sometimes happened, though not in this case.