This could also point to the solution of cutting down the complexity of "big tech". So much of that complexity isn't necessary because it solves problems, it just keeps people employed.
What is far more likely is the proverbial "JS framework problem:" gah, this technology that I read about (or encounter) is too complex, I just want 1/10th that I understand from casually reading about it, so we should replace it with this simple thing. Oh, right, plus this one other thing that solves a problem. Oh, plus this other thing that solves this other problem. Gah, this thing is too complex!
It’s not the same as introducing complexity to keep yourself employed, but the result is the same and so is the cause - incentive structures aren’t aligned at most companies to solve problems simply and move on.
https://inthesetimes.com/article/capitalism-job-bullshit-dav...
I'm not saying that these jobs are bullshit in the same way that a VP of box-ticking is, just that it's not a conspiracy that a cathedral based on 'design-doc culture' might produce incentives that result in people who focus on maximising their performance on these fiscally rewarding dot points, rather than actualising their innate belief in performant and maintainable systems.
I work at a start-up so if my code doesn't run we don't get paid. This motivates me to write it well.