zlacker

[return to "Most technical problems are people problems"]
1. woodyl+X6[view] [source] 2025-12-05 13:47:33
>>moored+(OP)
100% agree. Sadly, I have realised fewer people actually give an F than you realise; for some, it's just a paycheck. I am not sure what has happened over the decades regarding actually being proud of the work you produce.

I also think they tend to be the older ones among us who have seen what happens when it all goes wrong, and the stack comes tumbling down, and so want to make sure you don't end up in that position again. Covers all areas of IT from Cyber, DR, not just software.

When I have moved between places, I always try to ensure we have a clear set of guidelines in my initial 90-day plan, but it all comes back to the team.

It's been 50/50: some teams are desperate for any change, and others will do everything possible to destroy what you're trying to do. Or you have a leader above who has no idea and goes with the quickest/cheapest option.

The trick is to work this out VERY quickly!

However, when it does go really wrong, I assume most have followed the UK Post Office saga in the UK around the software bug(s) that sent people to prison, suicides, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal

I am pretty sure there would have been a small group (or at least one) of tech people in there who knew all of this and tried to get it fixed, but were blocked at every level. No idea - but suspect.

◧◩
2. Hendri+Sb[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:10:43
>>woodyl+X6
> I am not sure what has happened over the decades regarding actually being proud of the work you produce.

Simple:

1. People lost ownership of the things they work on. In the early 1900s, more than half of the workforce was self-employed. Today, it is 10% in the US, 13% in the EU.

What you produce is not “yours”, it’s “your employer’s”. You don’t have ownership, and very limited to no agency.

2. People lost any tangible connection to the quality and quantity of their output.

Most workers don’t get rewarded for working harder and producing more or better output. On the contrary, they are often penalized with more and/or harder work.

To quote Office Space: “That makes a man work just hard enough not to get fired.”

3. People lost their humanity. They are no longer persons. They are resources. Human resources. And they are treated like it.

They are exploited for gain and dumped when no longer needed.

◧◩◪
3. taeric+rn[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:05:33
>>Hendri+Sb
This is almost certainly a nice story we tell ourselves about a mythical past that just didn't exist.

It can be annoying to say, but modern factory produced things are in an absurdly higher quality spectrum than most of what proceeded them. This is absolutely no different from when machined parts for things first got started. We still have some odd reverence for "hand crafted" things when we know that computer aided design and manufactured are flat out better. In every way.

As for ownership, I hate to break it to you, but it is very likely that a good many of the master works we ascribe to people were heavily executed by assistants. Not that this is too bad, but would be akin to thinking that Miyazaki did all of the art for the movies. We likely have no idea who did a lot of the work we ascribe to single artists throughout history.

On to the rest of the points, even the ones I somewhat resonate with are just flat out misguided. People were ALWAYS resources. Well before the modern world.

◧◩◪◨
4. Mirast+mu[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:35:37
>>taeric+rn
Computer and machine manufactured parts can be better, but it's a mistake to believe they always are. Take two contrasting examples.

In guitar manufacturing, CNC machines were a revolution. The quality of mid-range guitars improved massively, until there was little difference between them and the premium ones.

In furniture, modern manufacturing techniques drastically worsened the quality of everything. MDF and veneers are inherently worse than hand-crafted wood. The revolution here was making it cheaper.

CNC and other machining techniques raise the high bar for what's possible, and they have the potential to lower costs. That's it. They don't inherently improve quality, that's a factor of market forces.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. lupire+4x[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:46:23
>>Mirast+mu
Comparing a cheap thing to an expensive thing is absurd.

The appropriate comparison is which is better for the same price

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Mirast+9F[view] [source] 2025-12-05 16:15:48
>>lupire+4x
If the cheap thing replaces the expensive thing and there is no same-price comparison, is it absurd? My point is that many products that were handmade at high quality no longer exist because of modern manufacturing. If you want a chair or, say, a set of silverware at the same inflation-adjusted price it would have been available for seventy years ago, you can't get it because the market sector has shifted so thoroughly to cheaper, worse products (enabled by modern manufacturing) that similar quality is only available through specialty stores at a much higher price. This happens even if the specialty stores are using computer-aided techniques and not handcrafting, because of the change in economics of scale.
[go to top]