tylerjharden

Excellent set of criteria, thank you. Something like am archlint, or performance lint, and sanity check on tests "Actually testing a seam or function" of the actual code base sound like good research avenues.

Could you share some higher bars that may make up a better "rubric" for this issue? I am actively trying to do so. Shy of just condensing core Manning publications that cover domains of interest, I am struggling to find a good bar to have my clankers validate against outside of minimizing cyclomatic complexity.

No, you don't, and I am not saying I feel that was reasonable, just that it was an emotional appeal used to sell it to the layfolk.

It isn't 100% causality, but it was definitely one of the ways it was sold to people through PR/propaganda.

Free trade / globalism was the larger "true" move, and yes getting away from unions and high wages to maximize profits was a big part.

Corporations made a change from valuing stakeholder value (employees, communities, customers, suppliers, the nation) to pure shareholder value (profits over everything else, despite the long term result that profits by any and all means hurts all stakeholders and eventually can cannibalize the company unless you have monopolistic moats).

The outsourcing of manufacturing was largely influenced by the externality of environmental pollution. People wanted to live in clean habitats. We had rivers on fire for weeks, extinction of species, and horrible pollution causing cancer and birth defects. Giving "the commies" the dirty, dangerous jobs, and moving everyone up into middle management and white collar knowledge work was seen as an evolution of the economy.

The political move to put all of that death and destruction onto China, where environmental regulation is willfully ignored in the interest of economics, was a smart move on their end.

We lost so much intellectual knowledge and other "tribal" technology in these processes to this outsourcing, which is unfortunate. We're almost having to rebuild our manufacturing from first principles, which may not be a bad thing.

As far as maintainability is concerned, have we all forgotten the 12 Factor App in the age of AI?

https://12factor.net/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-Factor_App_methodology

Kevin Hoffman expanded on that with the 15-factor app: https://developer.ibm.com/articles/15-factor-applications/

Mind you I may be dating myself as I was first introduced to this paradigm in 2015 working as a Java SpringBoot engineer on an enterprise project that I then migrated (57 microservices) all to Scala, after onboarding two weeks to Scala fresh from no prior Java experience.

I feel like there is so much "wisdom" encoded in books and writings from some of the most prolific engineers and architects over the last several decades.

Look at Matt Pocock's skills with simple primitives like grilling the human, researching through wayfinder maps (a Godsend to my workflow prior to Cursor Projects and orchestrator patterns), and having a solid Domain Driven Design through defining a shared glossary and breaking up work around proper seams.

Wouldn't Avro or Parquet be solid choices for something like this, or am I out of date & out of touch?

I wish there was more transparency and discussion brought to the water and power consumption of other major industries today, as well as the historical use and environmental impact of pre-EPA industries and early manufacturing. I want to believe that relatively, AI data centers and hyperscalers are much less damaging than the industrial revolution-era factories, but without knowing the absolute impacts of both to compare, all this fear mongering and propaganda is going to continue to drive knee-jerk reactions as opposed to well-informed analysis and discussion.

Does anyone have any sources for this sort of data?

Can you explain what PUE stands for? I am lost.

The underside of an iceberg is known as the "covfefe"