Hacker Neue

Preferences
throwanem parent
Oh, certainly. In a world with far fewer failed software projects, it trivially follows that people would want far less software.
pixl97
Not sure, what you're saying follows broken windows fallacy.

Good software might begat the need for more good and useful software.

FirmwareBurner
>Good software might begat the need for more good and useful software.

Where's the proof for that? And what do you define "good SW"? For the management, "good SW' is whatever makes money fast. It's business.

SW isn't like building chruches or bridges, something to last 100+ years, but something with an incredibly limited lifespan, that will have to be rewritten anyway, so why bother investing too much in "good SW" if "OK SW" will do the same job anyway?

pixl97
Open source is business?, and the hundreds of thousands of packages that have spawned from it?

>but something with an incredibly limited lifespan,

Oh hell, I found a js developer with their package du jour. Meanwhile in a lot of enterprise you work with software that is positively ancient.

throwanem OP
Define "good" and see if the question still makes sense. If we define it to mean "fit for the purpose declared as its basis for funding," then either high-dollar-value fraud is so prevalent in this industry as to qualify it for comparison with Scientology and other MLMs, or the industry simply cannot be attempting in fact to do what it claims to be trying to do. Which might amount to the same.

For that matter, how do you know good software really doesn't last centuries? The practice of software's creation has yet to see its hundredth birthday. We have quite literally not had time to tell, and early results seem suggestive in really either direction.

throwanem OP
That was the fallacy I sought to satirize, not too successfully, I think.

This item has no comments currently.