• 1 Post
  • 57 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle





  • No thanks. It’s way more fun to be part of the decision process. If a manager can anticipate all of the requirements and quirks of the project before it even starts, it’s probably going to be a really boring, vanilla project at which point it’s probably just better to but the software.ä somewhere else.

    Creating something new is an art in itself. Why would you not want to be a part of that?

    Also: Isn’t it cheating to compare the two approaches when one of them is defined as having all the planning “outside” of the project scope? I would bet that the statistics in this report disregard ll those projects that died in the planning phase, leaving only the almost completed, easy project to succeed at a high rate.

    It would be interesting to also compare the time/resources spent before each project died. My hunch is that for failed agile project, less total investment has been made before killing it off, as compared to front loading all of that project planning before the decision is made not to continue.

    Complementary to this, I also think that Agile can have a tendency to keep alive projects that should have failed on the planning stage. “We do things not because they are easy, but we thought they would be easy”. Underestimating happens for all project but for Agile, there should be a higher tendency to keep going because “we’re almost done”, forever.



  • Yes. The whole post is a trick with statistics. Web pages have a limited lifespan. You can do the aame trick with human life spans.

    “50 % of humans that lived 60 years ago are now dead”. You would tweak the numbers to be factual but something like that makes sense to me.

    If you only keep the samples you started out with, of course it’s going to decline over time. The data is guaranteed to not grow since nothing is ever added.







  • Yes you should. I think most comments here are about products that have millions of users where it’s actually worthwhile spending all that extra time and money to perfect things.

    For most development, it isn’t worthwhile and the best approach is to wing it, then return later to iterate, if need be.

    The same goes for most craftsmanship, carpentry in particular. A great carpenter knows that no-one will see the details inside the walls or what’s up on the attic. Only spend the extra time where it actually matters.

    It triggers me immensely when people say “I could have made a better job than that” about construction work. Sure maybe with twice the budget and thrice the time.





  • systematic teaching of humans, where we are teaching each other causal relations. The two are fundamentally different.

    So you mean that a key component to intelligence is learning from others? What about animals that don’t care for their children? Are they not intelligent?

    What about animals that can’t learn at all, wheere their barains are completely hard wired from birth. Is that not intelligence?

    You seem to be objecting that OPs questions are too philosophical. The question “what is intelligence” can only be solved by philosophical discussion, trying to break it down into other questions. Why is the question about the “brain as a calculator” objectionable? I think it may be uncomfortable for you to even speak of but that would only be an indicator that there is something to it.

    It would indeed throw your world view upside down if you realised that you are also just a computer made of flesh and all your output is deterministic, given the same input.