Honestly, I think it's time for me to find another line of work.
Honestly, I think it's time for me to find another line of work.
> the quality of the software being produced is decreasing
I feel these two are related. I mean, one could say the same looking at companies like Boeing post McDonald Douglas merger.
Count me in when you find it!
What I miss from technology is the group of people I used to collaborate with during my university years. We used to work on one thing and one thing only (UNIX Philosophy anyone?) and there was no way we would not master our craft back then or the subject we were given to work on.
Nowadays everything feels like work on bleeding edge and don't care about the quality of code nor the security of your own libraries.
I feel so awful with myself for choosing such a wrong direction.
Those who work with the legacy codebase, it really depends of the type of legacy infrastructure.
If it's a mad chaos, they prefer not to discuss it with me because they get anxious knowing they will work on that monstrosity the very next day and don't want to ruin their evening lol!
Else if it's rather clean comparing its legacy status, they don't mind, but worry about their future; they don't want to stay outdated from a tech point of view, in case they need to look for a job.
There are lots of great reasons to pursue work in computers, and not wanting to clean toilets for a living is a perfectly valid one.
It's just not what motivates me, and I'm commenting about why I don't feel like there's a role for me in the industry anymore.
Just spitballing, but I wonder if that’s in part because theres not much monetary incentive to go above and beyond.
Companies don’t seem to give out raises or promotions for good work as much as they do for more political reasons. And I’m sure we’ve all heard stories about the new guy getting hired on for much better pay than the loyal veterans. Personally, this is why I think job hopping and resume driven development are so popular.
If I’m someone primarily motivated by money, and there’s no monetary incentive to go above and beyond, why would I waste my time trying?
Genuine interest in the technology? That'll boost my competence leaps and bounds (through the experience I have pre-cached from my time off of work alone) for no extra pay!
In other words, at dev level,
> someone primarily motivated by money
is likely far too up Maslow's hierarchy for extra pay to make up for the problem of having pure "hired guns".
Thanks for sharing. What kind of "ethical issues" are you referring to?
But the ones that bother me the most are the ones where we abuse our customers for the sake of profit. Issues like data collection and use, "move fast and break things", removing customer autonomy, etc. are all things I struggle to be OK with, but are all things that are heartily embraced by the industry these days.
And don't even get me started on the acceptance of overt law-breaking. Companies like Uber (only an example, they're not the only ones that have done this) achieved success by breaking the law, and overall as an industry, we tend to accept this and even celebrate it -- as long as a successful, profitable business is the result.
Much like you put up hand rails on stairs, you will put guardrails on your CI/CD pipelines and processes. Do you do this from the start, or along the way. It really depends on what state things are in. Most industries cannot tolerate the development of software as more of an engineering discipline. This is disappointing when the likes of the auto industry doesn't. But it's largely expected otherwise.
Software development is a craft discipline, not an engineering one more often than not. Most systems are not life and death critical. It's more akin to making a dog house than a sky scraper most of the time.
Of course, there's also times where intentionally breaking something is the best solution to getting the fix done. From literally deleting the code/class/library that you are replacing and dealing with all the compiler errors as part of the fix. Or similarly, actually shutting off the non-secure protocol servers when the company decree has been to only use secure channels (TLS or similar) for communications, and breaking the systems that are still using the insecure channels after remaining up for years, "just in case."
Yes. The original sense of the term was fine and expressed a reasonable thing. Since then, it's been taken much too far and has been applied far outside the development process itself.
This attitude is, in my opinion, one of the things that has turned the software industry from being mostly a force for good into a very mixed bag.
An analogy to the car industry holds very well, I think. Early in the automotive days, people built cars because they loved to build cars. As it became an industry, and then a mature industry, that was largely lost. Now, the people who "build cars" are factory workers, punching a clock and putting in their hours. The industry stopped being about excellence and started being about maximizing profit.
That's where software is now.
I'm not saying that's a bad thing. It's clear that's a natural progression of new industries. However, that's not the sort of work that I want to do, and not what fulfills me.
I'm increasingly suspecting that there is no longer a role for the likes of me in the software industry.
I've been successfully doing that for most of my career, actually! But even as a small independent, you can't ignore the nature of the industry. Especially if you're selling to the industry. So it doesn't shield you from the market forces very much.
I fantasize about there being a market for high-end, boutique tools, libraries, and such -- but I don't think it exists. I'm not sure that it can exist given the nature of the industry overall.