[stcredzero]

It's something that accumulates organically in any real world project, because the real world doesn't care if your code is a paragon of programming excellence or not.

Which is short-sighted, really. Technical debt has somewhat the same properties as financial debt, which is why public companies have to disclose monetary debt and have plans for dealing with it. It's high time that the culture caught up to technical reality and started to treat technical debt in the same way. This is especially true for finance!

In a way you are basically saying the same thing, but the warning sign to note is your observation that "the real world doesn't care." It would be insane for the real world to not care about a company's financials, particularly its debt. It's just as insane with technical debt.

[cookiecaper]

Yes, I agree to an extent. I guess the problem is that quantification of technical debt is not so straightforward as financial debt.

When I say the "real world doesn't care", I don't necessarily mean that as a bad thing. The realities of shipping a product urge companies to make compromises. Like financial debt, technical debt is a useful tool, as long as it's used responsibly and kept under control.

[stcredzero]

Yes, but when the real world doesn't care so much about financial debt, things start failing. Witness 2008. This happens with tech debt too, it's just not well understood by the mainstream. I'm pretty sure when Alamo got acquired, it was in part due to their crappy software making them less convenient to visit and uncompetitive. I think it was them. I remember years ago one car rental company's agent terminals were so bad it just took twice as long to get through their line.