There is perhaps no greater example of a cargo-culted non-optimization than the choice of Alpine as a base image. This has cumulatively wasted millions of hours of developer time. And why? To reduce the base image size.

Image layers are cached and shared! If you have one image based on Ubuntu in your stack, you may as well base them all on Ubuntu, because you only need to download (and store!) the common base image once. And if you're such a purist that you've avoided anything but Alpine base images, what have you actually gained? Your deploy time is slightly faster? Your first cold boot is slightly faster? Outside of a few serverless use-cases, this is basically meaningless and almost never a real bottleneck (and even for serverless, there is probably some level of image caching across boots).

Meanwhile what did you give up? You opted out of the most well-tested and maintained versions of binaries, and forced all software in your image to link with musl instead of glibc. Congratulations on creating an ongoing headache for yourself. You've increased maintenance costs and probably even decreased security by preferring a less-audited codebase.

I suppose one positive side-effect of the Alpine cargo-cult is that some of its more technically-inclined adherents at least contributed back to projects to improve their cross-compilation toolchains. But otherwise, it's just been a huge waste of time for pretty much everybody.