Top
Best
New

Posted by venamresm__ 17 hours ago

Software is about people, not code (2020)(letterstoanewdeveloper.com)
48 points | 60 comments
randusername 16 hours ago|
Tired of these absolutes.

Software should be about the code, but not for every person on every project for all parts of that project.

It's great to "wake up" and realize that code doesn't have the intrinsic value you might have assumed, but you can also take that knowledge and go right back to writing beautiful code where it best serves the bigger mission.

CodeMage 15 hours ago||
> Tired of these absolutes.

Now, that is a letter to new developer that I wish I had read when I was a new developer:

Dear new developer,

Be careful when reading blogs. A lot of stuff you'll read online is insightful, informative, innovative, or inspiring. By all means, enrich your life with what you read, but be sure to also re-read "Wind in the Willows" from time to time and reflect on the character of Mr. Toad.

Regards,

Someone Who Made The Mistake of Putting Certain Bloggers on a Pedestal

cortesoft 15 hours ago||
Software is about all the things
JSR_FDED 17 hours ago||
When I was a developer I thought “without me all the people in the building have nothing to sell and they can all just go home”.

Then I spent a few years in sales (long story) and flipped 180 degrees. Without salespeople (and the customers they bring in) there would be nobody paying our salaries and we all could just go home.

CodeMage 16 hours ago||
You should have stopped at 90 degrees ;)

Without salespeople you can't sell software. Without developers, you can't make software. Since we all have to pay bills, selling software is of crucial importance, but that doesn't make the developers less important. It just means that the society we live in makes those who sell as important as those who make. Just like we strive to evolve software development, we should also strive to evolve the society.

I've made software that people happily used without anyone selling it to them or me earning a single cent off of it. At my age, if I had the luxury of not having to worry about money, that's the kind of thing I would be doing all the time.

inigyou 16 hours ago||
Sales is part of the capitalism layer that sits atop the actual work. Same as CEOs and finance. None of them do useful work, only decide what useful work gets done. In communism you couldn't sell software without a Party representative - that doesn't mean he's useful.
bumby 15 hours ago||
A less cynical take is that sales connects the people who need a problem solved to the people who can solve it.
manoDev 4 hours ago|||
Sales connects the pocket of the people who need a problem solved to the pocket of the people who invested on the company that promises to solve it.
bluefirebrand 13 hours ago|||
Modern sales pipelines don't behave this way in my experience.

A very common approach to sales nowadays is to invent a problem that someone does not have and then try to sell them your tool that fixes the problem

Or they try to map the problem you have to the problem they solve, even if they are actually quite different problems

The biggest problem that sales is trying to solve is that you aren't buying anything from them

bumby 13 hours ago||
Yeah, I see this. I think in that case, both the sales and development team are deadweight (ie self licking ice cream cones)
inigyou 13 hours ago||
I think the development team's work in this scenario is more akin to basic research. There is still some chance they may discover something unexpected.
bumby 11 hours ago||
It’s not basic research in the vast, vast majority of business cases you’re describing. They aren’t Bell Labs doing novel work, they’re usually doing busy work on mundane apps. I’m not going to move our understanding of financial physics forward playing around with a social media or CRUD app. Hell, most work isn’t even testing a hypothesis other than “I hope this change doesn’t break shit”

It comes across as “everyone else’s work is trivial and low value but my, MY, work is difficult and important”. We shouldn’t be so precious.

inigyou 7 hours ago||
sqlite came out of a CRUD app developer being unsatisfied with his database options
bumby 5 hours ago||
I took “basic research” to mean “fundamental research”. Sqlite is not fundamental research. It’s an exception that proves the rule. It was literally designed for a solving a specific problem. Somewhat ironically, it also comes from the industry that originated the term “self-licking ice cream cone”. An occasional useful offshoot doesn’t justify massive amounts of otherwise less useful busywork
inigyou 14 minutes ago||
Basic research is research done without an obvious application. In the same way, development can be done without an obvious application. All those mathematicians studying prime numbers in the 1600s-1800s came in useful later when we invented good cryptography.
arcwhite 17 hours ago|||
Two things can be true simultaneously. Neither function works without the other.
chambored 16 hours ago||
The conjoined triangles of success.
janandonly 16 hours ago|||
And without the farmers pulling the potatoes out of the ground, we would all starve and die. So who is necessary, really?
wonger_ 16 hours ago||
Anywhere we can read some of your story? I'm always curious about devs that went into sales, or sales from a dev perspective
knuckleheads 16 hours ago||
"Software [ought to be] about people, not code"

Related but not quite the same as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem

quinncom 15 hours ago|
Raising the is–ought fallacy here i s a category mistake that weakens the author’s argument.

“Software is about people” argues:

> I used to think software was fundamentally about code. Experience taught me that I was mistaken. Software is fundamentally an artifact made by people, for people’s purposes, and its success depends on them.

“Software ought to be about people” says:

> Software isn’t necessarily about people, but I believe it should be.

You may argue the latter, but I think the OP believes software is already shaped by humans .

agentultra 16 hours ago||
I think people are one factor. Source does, when done well, communicate intent and implementation precisely to other people. If the language has enough semantic information it can communicate some part of the specification as well. Knowing what to write and ensuring your software does what you think it does is an important part of a project. It takes working with people to build the correct understanding of the specification and requirements.

But to a degree it is also about the code. Sometimes your requirements are: be fast enough. In which case you need to think about code: instructions and data.

fasterik 13 hours ago||
John Carmack made a similar point:

"Software is a just a tool to help accomplish something for people - many programmers never understood that. Keep your eyes on the delivered value, and don't over focus on the specifics of the tools"

That said, I don't think Carmack would ever say that software isn't about code. It's more that code should be written and evaluated based on how much net value it delivers to people, not on arbitrary technical metrics.

livingsoft 16 hours ago||
Close, but no. Software is about the mind, and its ability to shape (and be shaped by) its environment. Software was about "people" back when we had to pool our keystrokes together just to keep simple websites running - now we have the technical means to face the true nature of the problem, which is political: just like people have autonomy over their bodies, they deserve autonomy over their software, without having to rely on a corrupt and incompetent industry, addicted to ruining their own products for profit.
CodeMage 16 hours ago|
> just like people have autonomy over their bodies, they deserve autonomy over their software, without having to rely on a corrupt and incompetent industry

The technical means you mention won't give you that. The same people that make the industry "corrupt and incompetent" are leveraging those technical means to make it even more corrupt and less competent. Meanwhile, the rest of us who work in that industry are rapidly losing power to push back.

You can't rely solely on technology to solve problems rooted in human nature. I mean, we have better technology than at any point in human history, and somehow we're regressing on the issue of bodily autonomy.

This is why I'm so frustrated with people who are fanatical about AI adoption. It's not a panacea, it won't usher in some shiny utopia, it's just another technology that can be used both to improve lives and to oppress. If you take a careful look at our society, you can see which of those two uses is currently dominant.

andrekandre 4 hours ago||

  > You can't rely solely on technology to solve problems rooted in human nature.
i just reply to highlight this; so many people don't get this...
WCSTombs 16 hours ago||
When you're first starting out as a junior software developer, normally you do focus on just the job in front of you, i.e., the code, and the seniors have to deal with everything else. As you mature into your role, you gradually increase the scope of your work and start to take bigger and bigger views of the problem, which involves more communication and more people. That's just the natural progression of a software development career, not some big bombshell secret.
throwaway27448 16 hours ago||
Software can be modeled as a social relation. Unless you're manufacturing your own chips from scratch, that is. Charging people for software never sat right with me.
xboxnolifes 10 hours ago||
Near everything is a social relation, if I'm understanding your point right. Why is charging for software different from charging for most any other thing?
bumby 15 hours ago||
What about charging people for electronic books? From an IP perspective, code is just a really bad book.
throwaway27448 12 hours ago||
Agreed—electronic books should be free.
bumby 11 hours ago||
I don’t agree, but understand the sentiment.
negativi 16 hours ago||
Great article, I will have more meetings and care less about the code quality. I am sure everything will work out fine.
rambojohnson 16 hours ago|
The compiler doesn't care whether your code is elegant. Your coworkers do. That's literally why code quality exists.
Kinrany 14 hours ago|
Every single thing people care about is about people when discussed by people
More comments...