|
|
|
|
|
by short_sells_poo
642 days ago
|
|
People aren't incentivised to write code that somehow carries true legacy the same way that a master mason will want their work to be a legacy for decades, if not centuries. This creates a positive feedback loop where people just shit out software as fast as possible, which then means the next person to come around will be met with maintaining a pile of poo. This person will also not have any time (or mental energy) to do anything to be proud of and so the circle continues. And it's entirely understandable. Clueless PM ABC wants to increase some barely relevant KPI so they can get a pat on their head from Clueless VP XYZ. PM ABC thus invents yet another user hostile feature in Windows 11, and thus Programmer 123 gets the thankless task to integrate ads in the right-click context menu. The programmer might be an artisan at their craft, but ultimately they just want to get their 9-5 done so they can do some actually exciting stuff in their free time. Then 1 year later Programmer 124 comes around and is horrified to see the boondoggle that 123 left behind. |
|
You raise a great point. Methinks there's a pernicious "assumed ephemerality" of software systems that has a "flywheel" sort of effect in that loop, creating sinks, which, thus, "enshittify".-
I honestly wonder what it would look like if software were "set in stone", and the assumptions were reversed. You were building systems for the ages, and ever and ever ...