[igornadj]

Does anyone else get the feeling that how we deal with technical debt in software is fundamentally and critically misguided?

How a pot hole gets filled in isn't a technical challenge, its a political challenge.

Developers can talk about the _technical_ side of technical debt all day long, but its a) generally well understood already, and b) blowing in the wind. How technical debt is handled is fundamentally a political problem.

We may understand this at a glance, but the solution of "gain knowledge and bring it up at standup" is not only not getting us anywhere, it's deliberately misleading us into thinking its up to us individually to change the organisation. It's as silly as telling the labourer that part of their job is to lobby the city council to spend more time and resources on filling pot holes.

Discussions on technical debt should be within the bounds of how to identify organisations where technical debt is identified as a real issue from the top down, and a survival guide for working in organisations where it is not.