Software is a liability, not an asset. Treating the construction and maintenance of this horrible liability knows as “code” is a complete misunderstanding of what software actual is.
The book value of the k8s work could be completely expensed as soon as it is replaced.
Also, your belief that "software is a liability" is irrelevant. What matters is that tax law calls software an asset (as does most everyone else, even ones who fundamentally understand it).
This is true everywhere and always.
I agree with you, lots and lots of software definitely has the properties of an asset. There’s also plenty of software that’s hastily written, untested, and basically not fit for use beyond a short expiration date. More like a jug of milk with a shelf life than a fine grand piano with resale value.
Are people assets? Certainly not on the balance sheet I hope.
What about a contract? Is a contract an asset? I’m actually curious, not trying to be a smart ass.
Others (say, an investor) might view a contract as an “asset” because of the future value it might bring, but not in a traditional accounting sense.
A contract can be an asset. Usually the unrealized future value of the agreement has value should you need to make a deemed disposition (or have some other valuation event). It gets very obviously complicated and fuzzy though, which is where accountants make the big bucks. It's pretty rare that a company chooses to make a contract valuable, but it often comes up in bankruptcy proceedings.
As an example of contracts having value, a few years ago I was involved in the acquisition of some media distribution assets, and one such asset was a transferable "MFN" contract with a major publisher. That was a very, very valuable asset.