The above post makes sense with this context, but I wouldn't say it was needlessly downvoted. A post doesn't stand on its own when it throws around uncommon metaphors without explanation.
Personally, I'd prefer of posts/articles all explained their metaphors and acronyms before using them. This is Hacker News, not Enterprise IT News. For example, the article tosses out USP and CI which I don't believe are very common terms either. They should be spelled out.
There's lots of technologists on HN and lots of business types, and only a subset of each understand the other's lingo. People should try and explain their lingo when they use it, for the benefit of the other camp :)
For people with government / federal contracting experience that aren't familiar with the 'USP' jargon (as I wasn't, once), the appropriate federal term is "key differentiator".
To be fair, the metaphor is pretty common in our industry, especially if you've ever done (or been lectured about) project management.
My take is that I've never seen a chicken or a pig program a computer, so if you need code produced, you'd better not get either. But then, talking about project management really brings out my inner asshole.
Maybe the comment is being downvoted because "Chicken and Pig" is a dehumanizing way to speak of someone. Personally, I'm not thrilled to know what the analogy means and even less thrilled when I hear it bandied about.
Personally, I'd prefer of posts/articles all explained their metaphors and acronyms before using them. This is Hacker News, not Enterprise IT News. For example, the article tosses out USP and CI which I don't believe are very common terms either. They should be spelled out.