What a very insightful talk. It's crazy that with the overwhelming amount of evidence that suggests that people should manage complexity as soon as possible, especially in distributed systems which most projects are, many software companies still force their devs to manage complexity after MVP release or very close to it. From my experience, these people always believe that rushing bad MVPs fast is better because being first to market is more important. I don't think these companies understand that being first doesn't matter if the codebase is unmaintainable after a year from MVP release due to extremely bad decisions from everyone involved. There's a reason unicorn companies are not profitable and would literally not exist if they didn't receive millions in funding from investors believing the same lie. Software engineering is a profession for people that can do trade off analysis, and most people managing software engineers can't do this and don't allow their software engineers to do their trade off analysis and actually use that as input into their development, which is why we end up with clusterf*cks of codebases even in EDA projects.
There's a lot going on here - the first thing is $, there's not an infinite budget, most companies need to get something out there so customers can try it, give their opinion, and then the companies will move to capture more of the market by reacting appropriately to that feedback (fix/build more) Start ups are generally working to find that magic "capture enough of the market to get an income" sweet spot. There's next to no point spending a lot of time/money getting something perfect that nobody wants to use/buy. Scale-ups, on the other hand, are companies that have something that the market wants, and are now dealing with having to produce a reliable/scaleable system, and that's when engineering needs to manage complexity and technical debt (and has the budget to do so)
We have the teeny Farm-Maxx mini round baler, and we love it. A small horse farm with a small tractor and a 7+ acre hay field. It’s too hard for us to manage the bigger bales, so we mostly had to buy square bales each year. By saving thousands of dollars not buying hay, we were able to justify the purchase of the baler and a Tedder/rake. The bale size is perfect for me to move around by hand, and store in smaller barns and sheds, without needing a tractor to move the bales.
Thanks for the opportunity to talk, was a great day ♥️
hands down the best EDA summary video I have watched. Thank you for making this and sharing it with us!
Great talk! Loved your presentation style too
@@jscancella thanks! Glad you enjoyed it
@@juancruzdelatorre7923 thank you 🤘
A brilliant talk thank you
Good talk - thanks.
What a very insightful talk. It's crazy that with the overwhelming amount of evidence that suggests that people should manage complexity as soon as possible, especially in distributed systems which most projects are, many software companies still force their devs to manage complexity after MVP release or very close to it. From my experience, these people always believe that rushing bad MVPs fast is better because being first to market is more important. I don't think these companies understand that being first doesn't matter if the codebase is unmaintainable after a year from MVP release due to extremely bad decisions from everyone involved. There's a reason unicorn companies are not profitable and would literally not exist if they didn't receive millions in funding from investors believing the same lie. Software engineering is a profession for people that can do trade off analysis, and most people managing software engineers can't do this and don't allow their software engineers to do their trade off analysis and actually use that as input into their development, which is why we end up with clusterf*cks of codebases even in EDA projects.
There's a lot going on here - the first thing is $, there's not an infinite budget, most companies need to get something out there so customers can try it, give their opinion, and then the companies will move to capture more of the market by reacting appropriately to that feedback (fix/build more)
Start ups are generally working to find that magic "capture enough of the market to get an income" sweet spot.
There's next to no point spending a lot of time/money getting something perfect that nobody wants to use/buy.
Scale-ups, on the other hand, are companies that have something that the market wants, and are now dealing with having to produce a reliable/scaleable system, and that's when engineering needs to manage complexity and technical debt (and has the budget to do so)
Event Catalog is a pretty good little tool. Does a good job of filling a niche well
No events, only Tao.
We have the teeny Farm-Maxx mini round baler, and we love it. A small horse farm with a small tractor and a 7+ acre hay field. It’s too hard for us to manage the bigger bales, so we mostly had to buy square bales each year. By saving thousands of dollars not buying hay, we were able to justify the purchase of the baler and a Tedder/rake. The bale size is perfect for me to move around by hand, and store in smaller barns and sheds, without needing a tractor to move the bales.
Haha rediscovering the 30-year old Erlang.
… and static typing.
@@stevenhe3462 So in other words, Akka Typed?
No meat, not even any bone....