zlacker

[return to "Can't be fucked: Underrated cause of tech debt"]
1. lnxg33+h1[view] [source] 2023-10-12 16:27:16
>>todsac+(OP)
I tend to consider bullshit any point that finds somehow acceptable thinking that people is lazy, in this society, in this world, on this planet, ffs we have to work 40 hrs per week per decades and rest after reincarnation, and you want to talk about laziness? Let's talk about how any bit of mental energy is extracted to built other's wealth and then when you are too old to do nothing other than watching work in progress they just spit you out

when I am supposed to fix tech debt? if every week there is another functionality going out that needs to be done yesterday? Do you think that I have to do it in my free time? Why should I even bother existing

◧◩
2. hombre+U4[view] [source] 2023-10-12 16:45:09
>>lnxg33+h1
That's how I burned out of software.

On a mature project in a small team, the only tickets left were hard bugs that nobody wanted. The kind of bugs where you can invest days and have nothing really to show for it except crossing out some suspicions. Or maybe incorrectly crossing one out and then going on a wild goose chase until you circle back to it in a week, flustered.

You're expected to commit all of your mental energy to these tickets day after day, and then once you finally triumph and solve the bug after coffee or amphetamine binges, you turn in the code, close the ticket, and you're expected to immediately work on the next ticket.

You don't get a real break. But you can mentally rest at the start of the next ticket since nobody expects instant results. But now it's been a couple days and people are asking you what you've been doing so far—you must be blocked, right?—but you've barely started and you're pressured to invent small lies and excuses about why you're behind, each one risking yet another slip of the mask.

And when you need some time off the most, it's when you're the most behind of all and people have begun to notice, so taking the time off doesn't even seem like an option.

◧◩◪
3. vegeta+M5[view] [source] 2023-10-12 16:49:35
>>hombre+U4
Agile solves a lot of these problems.
◧◩◪◨
4. liveon+k7[view] [source] 2023-10-12 16:55:07
>>vegeta+M5
Now, of course, everybody is going to start moaning, "But I have all this speed. I'm agile. I'm fast. You know, this easy stuff is making my life good because I have a lot of speed."

What kind of runner can run as fast as they possibly can from the very start of a race?

[Audience reply: Sprinter]

Right, only somebody who runs really short races, okay?

[Audience laughter]

But of course, we are programmers, and we are smarter than runners, apparently, because we know how to fix that problem, right? We just fire the starting pistol every hundred yards and call it a new sprint.

https://github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/blob/master/Hi...

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. romano+dn[view] [source] 2023-10-12 18:11:10
>>liveon+k7
Agile isn't meant to imply speed in the sense of LoC/s, though right? The speed in Agile is about getting customer feedback sooner rather than later (so maybe a kind of latency?). I don't think sprints are mentioned in the Agile manifesto or related materials.

And even within frameworks like Scrum, I don't think that "sprint" was ever intended to mean that programmers are supposed to be in permanent crunch mode.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. rpeden+Js[view] [source] 2023-10-12 18:34:40
>>romano+dn
Words matter, though.

Why call it a sprint if it's not supposed to be anything sprinting? We can literally call it anything we want, so why not pick a better metaphor?

I think that many developers who say they dislike Agile really mean they dislike Scrum. I mean, a rugby scrum is pretty violent, and sprinting non-stop is a good way of dying of exhaustion.

Come to think of it, some managers do seem to want the workplace to be a ruthless battleground with worker pitted against worker in a relentless flat-out sprint to seen as a "high performer".

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. nradov+Ly[view] [source] 2023-10-12 18:57:35
>>rpeden+Js
The Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) simply calls it an iteration. This is a neutral term with no implications about the pace of work.

https://scaledagileframework.com/iterations/

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. __loam+xA1[view] [source] 2023-10-13 01:27:58
>>nradov+Ly
SAFe is a failed ideology: https://seandexter1.medium.com/beware-safe-the-scaled-agile-...
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. nradov+VQ1[view] [source] 2023-10-13 03:53:45
>>__loam+xA1
There's nothing ideological about SAFe. It's simply a collection of best practices which work reasonably well in most organizations. You can pick and choose which pieces to adopt and which to ignore. Like any methodology, it can't compensate for toxic management, technical incompetence, or lack of product market fit.

If you don't like SAFe then please be specific. Which parts of it don't work if actually followed as documented?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. __loam+h62[view] [source] 2023-10-13 06:25:50
>>nradov+VQ1
I literally linked an article going through why SAFe is MBA garbage that misunderstands why agile was created in the first place but if that's not specific enough for you then I'm not sure what you're looking for.
[go to top]