... and the jump from 1 to 0 is utterly, fundamentally different than the progression from N to 1.
-
-
-
@avibryant@chadfowler It seems to me that if anything, converging on one makes the quality of that "one" more relevant, not less. -
@erniemiller@avibryant@chadfowler remove the article’s title / last sentence and you get an accurate but banal description of “progress” -
@erniemiller@avibryant@chadfowler keep them and you get OMG THOUGHT LEADER FUTURIST
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant Now non-engineer can open Shopify store, start big business. Much closer to 1 on open-ended problems, but directionally to 0. -
@gerstenzang but the open ended problems are the interesting ones. There will never be a Shopify that lets you start the next Google. -
@gerstenzang where we differ may simply be that any activity that creates new software - regardless of tool - I would call engineering.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant Also, pretty sure you could swap out “AWS” for “4GL” and it’d fit right into 1994 just fine. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
pretty sure I read this article c. 1985
@avibryant ... something, something Fifth Generation ... something, something http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_computer#Failure …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@avibryant The idea that it is even converging on 1 is laughable, but great point -
@skamille@avibryant we are biased. I kind of agree with a lot of that actually. Difficult to see because it is so far future. -
@polotek@avibryant Maybe? I mean, I work in a post-AWS startup, and the idea that one person could produce all the shit we need to run... -
@polotek@avibryant and like, I'm not usually solving the hardest computing problems. But I'm solving a LOT of problems at once. -
@polotek@avibryant The examples given of post-AWS startups at least started out with VERY narrow focus and features. Do one thing, scale it -
@polotek@avibryant I believe that you might be able to do that with 1 (or 0?) engs in the future. But also those will be more ephemeral
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant but I suspect the goal is more about selling the VC "product"Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@avibryant Fred Brooks argued the opposite point in "No silver bullet" and still holds almost 30 years after.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@avibryant It starts off by conflating force multiplication with democratization and ends with enthusiastic cloud-waving. Hard pass.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@avibryant@skamille I think it is wrongheaded -- component-based just-compose software has always been "10 years from now", remains soThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.