Luc, you are missing the point: this isn't the forum for that discussion regardless of how valid the points in that discussion are. This is a _Clojure_ forum, not a 'what's wrong with the (technology) world' forum, I would suggest this isn't even a 'how can Clojure fix the world' forum.
Luc, please read the various responses carefully - replying by validating the points in your discussion/justifying your position is missing the point, please do not reply until you understand that. I think we should just let this thread die, so I'm out. On 26 March 2015 at 13:08, Luc Préfontaine <lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca> wrote: > The 'attack' word is again a manifestation of extreme political correctness. > > I will argue that these technologies with their inherent complexity are > creating huge > bureaucracies to attract and hide unqualified/unskilled/uncommited/... aka > 'stupid' people > from scrutiny. > > These environments have the perverse effect of encouraging people not to think > too much at least not publicly because of that political correctness pushed > to the limit. > 'You are not a team player, blablablalbla...'. > > 'Stupidity' is not off topic here, not at all. It's been a plague for two > decades in this industry > as soon as demand increased for sotfware. It started to attract people mid > 80s because of > the promise to get a well paid job. Not because they had above average skills > or had a keen > interest in it. 'I do not need to understand technology, I'll be a manager in > three years'. > This a real quote from a colleague when I was quite green. > > Meanwhile HR replaced know-how by worthless tags (add water to this pouch and > you will get a > Java/Ruby/... asset) and processes hoping to use a Taylor approach to > creativity like > if we were building cars on an assembly line. > > Some would argue that without this enterprise mass market, we would not have > the technology > we have at hand these days. True. The industry has been recycling old concepts > for 30 years branding them as new. Huge costs with incremental changes. > > This mitigated success is limited by this assembly line model. > And unlike a car plant, it cannot be robotized. > You need to change wetware... Hence the 'stupidity' factor discussion. > > Now if the anonymity thing bugs you, I can bring forward explicit names in > this thread > with the failing projects, budget, ..., just let me pull my notes here... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your > first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
