return to table of content

If architects had to work like programmers (1995)

teeray
52 replies
17h34m

Also, I don’t care how you accomplish this work, but you must atomize your anticipated work into individual bite-sized and estimated tasks. Your estimates need not be accurate, but you will be held accountable if you run over your estimates and be met with suspicion if your estimates are arbitrarily deemed too high.

You will be left to execute these tasks as you see fit, but you must report progress on them daily in a one-hour meeting along with every other architect working on entirely unrelated work. You may be asked to repeat this same oral update in other meetings. These meetings may be time consuming, but you will still be expected to meet your time estimates.

During this project to design my house, there may be periods of time when I may require you to assist with architectural emergencies, such as stabilizing the Leaning Tower of Pisa. These emergencies supersede your work and may come at any hour of the day or night, but should not impact your time estimates.

happymellon
26 replies
15h22m

Your pencil to draw the diagrams will be managed by a completely different person, you are not allowed to sharpen it yourself. However that person may not be available as they will be sharpening everyone else's pencils, as well as adjusting desks.

They are all from Blue Pants, so won't work the same time shifts as you

archerx
25 replies
12h27m

My last job was almost this. My question is how does it get to that point?

bregma
19 replies
10h10m

Microsoft Excel.

Someone spends hours torturing numbers in a spreadsheet until they give up and yield the desired answer. Pivot tables are created and used to make a slide deck using Microsoft Power Point. A decision is made, another round of golf played, and someone checks on the value of their non-salary compensation.

That the spreadsheet does not reflect your experienced reality is of little consequence because at that level, the spreadsheet is the reality. If your number doesn't reflect what's in Excel, you can be easily replaced with another number.

nonrandomstring
16 replies
9h52m

the spreadsheet is the reality.

This nails an entire culture, from healthcare, to education, to policing...

But we cannot blame software itself, right? Something went deeply, horribly wrong in our own societal script. Something way beyond Max Weber or Franz Kafka's takes on bureaucracy. SOmething that made us bow down before computers as new gods.

I'm becoming a techo-athiest.

phone8675309
5 replies
5h45m

But we cannot blame software itself, right?

If we can blame easy access to guns for the rise in mass shootings then we absolutely can and should blame easy access to Excel for the rise in MBA's completely fucking up companies.

datadrivenangel
4 replies
5h37m

Ban Assault Spreadsheets

phone8675309
1 replies
4h25m

We need to limit the row and column capacity of the spreadsheets we let people own, and also mandate that they must press a key for every cell that needs to be (re-)calculated.

It's just common sense.

happymellon
0 replies
2h16m

Although that's how we ended up with austerity.

nonrandomstring
0 replies
5h3m

If you ban spreadsheets then only managers will use spreadsheets. Spreadsheet bans actually increase rouge accountancy if you disarm law-abiding spreadsheet users. The only thing that stops an MBA with a spreadsheet is a nerd with a spreadsheet.

bregma
0 replies
2h20m

Wouldn't that violate your $A$2 rights?

vundercind
4 replies
7h56m

My dad worked for a major railroad from the late 70s through the tail end of the 90s.

He worked his way up middling-high in the management structure. High school diploma only.

The company got bought at some point. He says nearly all the management up to the C-suite had done actual work at the company, at some point. They promoted from within.

After the acquisition, a bunch of MBAs who’d never done actual railroad work took over. Says everything became endless, pointless meetings, a lot involving travel. Impossible to get any actual work done. The old-timers had to keep stopping them from doing dumb shit that couldn’t work.

The old timers got “encouraged” to take early retirement. And that was the end of that.

The take-over by professional managers and finance bros, rather than having professional (at the thing you actually do) managers running things, is behind it. The easy quips about MBAs ruining everything are more or less correct.

nonrandomstring
2 replies
7h18m

They would say your father was the victim of "progress and modernisation".

Yesterday there was this post [0] on Ivy League's wanting to separate ideology from teaching. As if that were possible.

We can read plenty regarding the decline of academia under leftist ideology. The long march of postmodernism is supposed to have corroded everything, decolonising curricula, celebrating diversity etc, etc.

Sure. That may well be true.

But equally true, through ferociously ignored is the parallel march of the ideological right in universities.

Just as there are some liberal arts degrees that teach Marxist feminism, Foucault and Derrida we have MBA's, which are equally ideological. They're steeped in the values of the Thatcher-Reagan era and right-wing economic theories. Their totems - Hayek, Strauss, Schmitt, Mises, Friedman are less well known than those on the left.

Nonetheless these often discredited ideologies are presented with the rigour of Maxwell's equations.

Off they confidently stride into the world, to run amok doing harm every bit as egregious as their left-leaning counterparts.

I've taught some of these kids in a business school, and honestly by year 3 they are utterly lost - all the hallmarks of cult-like brainwashing are fully in effect. Where the sceptics win over the strident zealots, is at least with the lefties there remains chink of openness to new ideas. An MBA is an MBA for life.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=39444092

woooooo
1 replies
5h38m

I don't think you can paint MBA-ification as a leftist phenomenon.

SpaceNoodled
0 replies
5h17m

That's probably why they didn't.

prpl
0 replies
4h23m

Have you posted this before?

digitalsushi
1 replies
7h7m

why is every mirror ugly

nonrandomstring
0 replies
6h41m

Except the black mirror maybe. That only shows us what we want to see.

dial9-1
1 replies
8h43m

scale of complexity

nonrandomstring
0 replies
7h58m

That's a tempting answer. I see why you proffer it. But I have to say no.

Complexity is neither an immanent feature nor inevitability. Behind unruly complexity is our failure to manage it. And indeed, a love of complexity, a fetish for it that seduces us into ever more.

To defeat complexity we have to embrace, and engage with it. We have to see what parts of technology that got us to where we are, must now be justifiably rejected.

All I see right now, especially with regards to "AI" and the new wave of techno-populism, is a retreat from complexity and more embrace of "magic".

maayank
0 replies
6h7m

Sounds like you'd enjoy All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace:

"Curtis argues that computers have failed to liberate humanity, and instead have 'distorted and simplified our view of the world around us.'"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Watched_Over_by_Machines_o...

icemelt8
0 replies
9h59m

This is such a great comment.

bqmjjx0kac
0 replies
8h54m

One day, the company that owned my apartment sent me a bill out of the blue for a strange amount of money, something like $63.12. After much head scratching, I realized that it was roughly equal to my monthly rent divided by 30.

Someone must have made a new spreadsheet because they insisted I owed them for one extra day of rent. I pulled out my copy of the contract, which required one check per month of exactly the same amount.

They said my contract was "wrong" and I entered full WTF mode. Offered them an advance of one day's rent that I'd deduct from the final rent check. Eventually they tired of me and "credited" me the amount in question instead of fixing their spreadsheet.

techcode
0 replies
11h25m

Was your last job a place with more focus on quarterly business cycle and less if any on longer term?

It might even be that there's seemingly a lot of long term goals/objectives/focus. If it's mostly strategic level plans/talks/etc, while day to day things are still planned, executed and evaluated on half-year and even just quarterly period - it seemingly ends same as not having longer term plans.

pyrale
0 replies
11h58m

My best explanation is that some people believe that project management can be completely oblivious to the nature of the work to be done, and still be useful.

To them, maximizing their ability to make choices about the way work will be done means they have more ability to take the good decisions that will lead the project to a successful end.

happymellon
0 replies
11h38m

Someone up top found a cheaper supplier of pencils. Unfortunately these are cheap pencils, so the graphite keeps breaking.

People are spending too much time sharpening their pencils, besides a good pencil sharpener is expensive. The solution is to get a sharpener person to move the sharpener about to save everyone time.

However they are expensive to employ so we are going to outsource it because sharpening pencils are not our core business.

It always starts as cheaping out on the free soda.

Unless, as was also mentioned, someone is a project/product manager without actually understanding the business.

gyulai
0 replies
10h33m

My question is how does it get to that point?

Putting salespeople in between engineers and clients, and giving them perverse incentives to say "yes" to everything the client asks, and no incentive at all to try to understand what it takes to actually get any of that stuff accomplished. It produces clients that live in fantasyland.

arkh
0 replies
11h48m

People whose only knowledge of management stopped at factory work in the 1920s.

mgoetzke
7 replies
15h38m

The last part is what constantly destroys me :)

ZaoLahma
6 replies
15h18m

For extra amusement, make it so that you have responsibility without authority.

I.e. you know what is broken and roughly how to fix it and in everyone's view it absolutely is your responsibility to "git'erdone", but you can't since you either don't have access or resources to do what needs doing and you won't get the access or the resources due to office politics or some other equally unfixable issue.

That's a fun little stress-biscuit to eat.

dxxth
1 replies
12h55m

This is very real in the context of many locked down, tightly-regulated industries such as DoD manufacturing gigs with poorly-managed webs of IT and Engineering infrastructure. Data governance and security, change and configuration management, are all cross functional teams with their own political priorities, cultures, budgets, and requirements. Sometimes even separate tools anf platforms with zero integration or worse, financial redundancy.

It is pain to work in such an environment.

pnutjam
0 replies
9h21m

Nothing is an emergency no matter how much you press, until one day it's a pants on fire, after hours wake-up call emergency. You cannot predict when this will happen.

adrianmsmith
1 replies
13h15m

Or you literally aren't allowed to fix it, while it also being your responsibility to fix it.

For example you see are responsible for fixing problem X, so you go to do it, and are told that X isn't on the planning board this month (because problem X hadn't occurred yet when planning happened at the start of the month) therefore you aren't allowed to work on it. But in other meetings, it's your fault it's not fixed, X is your job after all.

peteradio
0 replies
7h58m

Now this is podracing I mean Agile! - Aintworkin Scumwalker

whstl
0 replies
13h0m

For extra amusement, make it so that you have responsibility without authority.

Ah! The good old recipe for burnout.

tristor
0 replies
6h11m

For extra amusement, make it so that you have responsibility without authority.

Funny thing, that's basically the job description of a Product Manager, although HN loves to roast them, some of the hilarity comes from the fact you're accountable for outcomes and responsible for a process to get to those outcomes, but have no budget, have no reports, and you're trying to convince completely different management structures in completely different parts of the company that the thing you're working on is the thing they should prioritize or it all falls apart. Getting any significant new feature or new product to launch in any large company is basically a miracle, even if it arrives to launch hollowed out on the inside. This is mostly not a consequence of how well you do your job, it's a consequence of how dysfunctional the organization is, and I'll let you in on a secret.. /all/ large companies are deeply dysfunctional.

qprofyeh
3 replies
14h19m

There isn’t a more accurate description of “corporate agile” than exactly this. It’s a joke, and the joke’s on us.

devsda
1 replies
11h39m

If I'm ever telling stories to my future grand kids, they will definitely hear about the terror regime of an evil king named Agile .

arethuza
0 replies
10h35m

You are assuming that Agile can be killed?

At this point I'm thinking that it has seeped into the very nature of the world - like Morgoth's Ring.

TurboHaskal
0 replies
11h26m

Left an otherwise good job because of this.

I am done with it.

For the next job I take, I will demand to be present in the daily meeting to see how it looks like. Ideally, there isn't one.

fatherzine
3 replies
16h58m

<big tech> the building must make $10b/year in revenue, or else you are all fired.

gorbachev
1 replies
10h26m

...and if any individual room isn't profitable in any quarter of the year, I need the ability to detach it from the building and dump it. I don't care about any furniture inside, dump it too.

xgkickt
0 replies
8h11m

Each room must be constructed of experimental materials so we can claim an R&D tax credit on them before dumping them.

blkhawk
0 replies
14h34m

.... more than last year or you are all fired.

vrosas
2 replies
17h15m

Your firm’s partners have hired BCG to streamline the home building process. Your home and every other one in the neighborhood that your coworkers have been designing will be left to rot and most of you will be let go. Some of you will be reassigned to design horse stables and indoor pools for a more profitable market segment.

reactordev
1 replies
15h57m

Your neighborhood was sold to an HOA. All houses must conform to new rules, reporting, and ever increasing fees until all revenue is squeezed from the premises. Violators will be fined Fibonacci derived value amounts or forfeit their property to the HOA.

If you are still around by this time. Your equity is worthless.

RCitronsBroker
0 replies
15h52m

Fibonacci derived values is wayyy too un-arbitrary

ip26
1 replies
15h57m

It's suddenly not ridiculous at all if you map PM to general contractor and SWE to tradespeople.

disgruntledphd2
0 replies
11h28m

Well to be fair, most construction projects are bid on a fixed-price basis with overages, and there's normally a limitation of when stuff can be changed.

Generally, the optimal strategy for a construction company/contractor is to go in with a low fixed price bid and screw them on the extras that your specialists have identified will be necessary, but the general contractor/engineers have missed.

Source: I used to price construction jobs back in the day, and heard a lot of horror/joy stories. I think my college education was partially funded by these kinds of mess-ups, as my dad worked in construction.

sage76
0 replies
12h11m

you must atomize your anticipated work into individual bite-sized and estimated tasks

Based on a 2 line description from a product manager, so you actually have no clue on the scope of the task until you start working on it.

This is how at my last company, my team got every estimate wrong and engineers got fired.

Yes the salt is real.

reacharavindh
0 replies
10h54m

Oh an remember, before you can design a house, you need to build a scaffolding using the same tools one would to build a warehouse, make sure it is earthquake proof, nuclear threat proof, hurricane category 7 proof, forest fire proof etc regardless of whether there are forests, earthquake geology, or hurricanes nearby. After all, you can be proud that you followed the same principles that unicorn architects who build warehouses used successfully to _their_ needs.

Viliam1234
0 replies
35m

OK, now please build the second floor. We need it fully completed and functional a.s.a.p.

However, do not build the first floor yet, because I am still waiting for some important decisions to be made.

Fire-Dragon-DoL
0 replies
4h7m

You forgot to add, your estimates need to use an artificial, non-agreedu-upon unit that differs per person and that varies (decreases) as you find new work that's simpler than the simplest work you have ever encountered.

And then, you will be held accountable for that number, even if (supposedly), doesn't represent time and even if the interpretation of your estimate must use the unit that the person holding you acciuntable.

Wow as I re-read this statement, it's completely insane

oivey
41 replies
16h53m

This is really some next level victimhood. Building houses often does involve dealing with whiny homeowners/builders with bad taste and no clue who want everything but also don’t want to pay. That’s the job. Good software engineers know working with stakeholders and users is also the job.

I’ll add another shocker: sometimes blueprints are poorly specified and/or incorrect. And yet, people build the houses. That’s the job!

twelvechairs
14 replies
16h32m

Yes.

Conversely if programmers had to work like Architects they'd be paid a fraction, not get promoted to run serious projects until they are 50+, work copious unpaid overtime, not be allowed to work from home, be held legally liable for their work, spend most of their days focussing on compliance rather than outcomes, be more client focussed than they have ever considered regardless of above, etc.

throwitaway222
8 replies
16h4m

Some architects get hired to do a 50 unit apartment complex for 200k that only takes them a few months. The owners of those businesses farm it out to a junior to do the entire thing, then look over it quickly.

Said junior usually only does this for a maximum of 10 years and graduates to owning their own business. However 85% of them graduate to running a drafter business which just draws plans.

darkwater
5 replies
12h5m

BUT if there is a serious issue in the houses built by following the project you had signed, well, you will go to jail (or pay the fine). I still have to see a software engineer held PERSONALLY accountable, in front of the law, for a PII leak, for example.

adrianN
3 replies
11h5m

Try working in safety critical software. There liability is the norm.

darkwater
2 replies
9h41m

Yes, but basically every architect work is safety critical. If a construction collapses on itself, it will kill you.

sojournerc
1 replies
7h45m

Architects design, a structural engineer makes sure it stands up

darkwater
0 replies
6h42m

I think it depends on the type of work (and also legislation). For example I had architects calculating which kind/size of iron girder/joist (IDK the exact English word for it) put to replace a supporting wall. If they calculate that badly, the roof comes down at some point, and I die.

whiterknight
0 replies
6h57m

I am ignorant about this industry. But is it really the architect who is held liable? Not the civil engineer who signs off on the analysis?

freddie_mercury
1 replies
15h38m

There is not enough industry growth for every junior to own their own business in 10 years.

whatshisface
0 replies
15h20m

There is if the average size of said business is between 2 and 1.

wwilim
0 replies
12h43m

And be used as factotums if the investors ever notice they're good at getting things done. The amount of times my dad was asked to drive 5 hours somewhere to deliver a giant stack of paperwork to a local administration office to secure a building permit...

watwut
0 replies
13h8m

Programmers are rarely promoted to run serious projects. Many work a lot of unpaid overtime. Many of use spend our days focusing on compliance rather then outcomes.

shrimp_emoji
0 replies
7h11m

not get promoted to run serious projects until they are 50+

Uh, based?

seemaze
0 replies
5h27m

be held legally liable for their work

I've always been amazed that in software, you can call yourself an 'architect', 'engineer', or 'contractor' without any legal accountability. But I'm from the brick-and-mortar side of the fence.

oivey
0 replies
16h25m

Yes, and, if they wanted to just build to a spec like a construction worker, they’d get to look forward to getting paid even worse still, physically demanding labor, working in the hot, working in the cold, shitting in boiling portapotties, and shitting in frozen portapotties.

t_luke
6 replies
14h37m

If Programmers Had to Work Like Architects

- you aren't allowed to do any programming yourself, you just write a specification

- the majority of the people doing the programming are incapable of reading the specification

- many of those who can will deliberately ignore it to save money

- nevertheless, it's your fault if it's realised incorrectly

baud147258
3 replies
12h59m

If Programmers Had to Work Like Architects

According to my brother who work in construction, architects are often clueless on how to build stuff and existing material limitation, especially with the money he's given.

nazka
0 replies
9h51m

Yes they have to work with a structural engineer for that. Just like a car designer have to work with a mechanical engineer or a product manager with an software architect.

Architectes are not engineers they are designers and visionaries.

You can check this video for more info:

Structural Engineer vs Architect - Design Meeting https://youtu.be/29-xtjX8rAk?si=7dupEMwy3DEbs_Yi

blauditore
0 replies
12h47m

I get the same impression: There are many head-in-the-cloud architects who see themselves as artists. The equivalent totally exists in the software world; it's people who want to be pure "software architects", designing what others should implement. In my experience, this dictating mindset never works - designers (technical or not) should evolve their ideas with the implementors/builders, otherwise such disconnects happen.

Izkata
0 replies
6h35m

Around 15 years ago in college, a friend who was doing an architecture degree was complaining that LEED certification was making people ignore a lot of that kind of thing. That the certification was the most important thing to go for, above just about everything else.

marcosdumay
0 replies
5h27m

Is this about software architects?

But anyway, no, if the house is built incorrectly, the builders are liable, not the architect.

carlmr
0 replies
14h1m

This sounds a lot like normal software architect work at big corp. You write the spec, it gets sent off somewhere cheap, the people there lied on their CV or got their degree from a diploma mill, they will ignore your spec and make all the tests green instead of checking if they do something, and then you need to take responsibility.

magicalhippo
6 replies
15h37m

I’ll add another shocker: sometimes blueprints are poorly specified and/or incorrect.

A family member bought a plot, some blueprints for a two-story house from an architect firm and hired someone to build it.

Well into the construction, the builders asked if he would like them to raise the roof of the building by one meter, as it would be a negligible increase in cost.

He was going to reject the offer but changed his mind and accepted.

Once completed he realized that if he had rejected the offer, he wouldn't be able to use the second floor at all. The house had a Gable-style roof[1], and the stairs a U shape along one of the outer walls. Had he not raised the roof, one couldn't have walked up the stairs due to the roof being so low along the outer walls. Even after raising the roof, tall people would still need to tilt their heads going up.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gable_roof

dasil003
5 replies
14h54m

I love that they just asked it but they didn't explain why.

magicalhippo
4 replies
14h23m

Yeah I've always assumed they figured this wouldn't work, but ya never know...

The guy did get the drawings independently checked BTW, they were indeed drawn with the roof too low.

whstl
3 replies
12h53m

Maybe the builder assumed they noticed too, and if they had said no the builder would try to explain.

I only ever did one big renovation and built one house, but I've seen builders fixing mistakes from engineers and architects sooo many times.

mjevans
2 replies
10h39m

Minimum height in the stairway isn't part of the specification. The house being structurally sound so it doesn't collapse / otherwise cause a safety hazard in the building is.

Not sure if there's a type of architect that has to think about the wholistic picture including function, usability and general ergonomics. They probably cost more too.

whstl
0 replies
7h54m

Not sure if there's a type of architect that has to think about the wholistic picture including function, usability and general ergonomics.

Pretty much every architect I ever had to work with was like that.

brenschluss
0 replies
8h21m

Minimum height in the stairway isn't part of the specification

Uh, yes it is? It's in most building codes, as well as in the IBC (International Building Code).

Architects don't deal with structural soundness; that's a misconception. That's the domain of the structural engineer. The architect IS the generalist.

timeon
3 replies
13h9m

Still there is one difference. Architect needs to design not only within client's and technical constraints but also within legal regulations.

blauditore
2 replies
12h53m

...and so do programmers, increasingly so nowadays (at least it's very tangible in Europe).

whstl
0 replies
12h52m

Also true for a while for some industries like finance.

timeon
0 replies
9h26m

Some programmers. All architects.

ozim
3 replies
15h6m

Not really.

Most of developers jobs are “here is Jira ticket build what is written there”.

You get product owners, business analysts, scrum masters that should take away 90% of BS.

But still it is not the case and a lot of those business roles seem like they are just useless and I would do much better job directly talking to the customer.

rurban
2 replies
14h7m

You are a bit naive here. Those type customers are extremely common, and there are specialized jobs to deal with such customers.

In SW they are the PM's. Without a good PM to shield you from the customers insanities you are lost. In architecture or other engineering professions it's the same. As architect you have a special man to deal with politicians and special clients, and in many other professions even with the press, who has no idea either.

Never talk directly to the customer. Or if so, you are not allowed to make promises.

runtu
0 replies
13h10m

You shouldn't be talking to the customer to hear what monstrosity of an application they think they want months from now, or even what "features" they think they want added.

You should talk to the customer to understand the problems they have, and work with them to figure out the smallest thing that might help them solve their biggest problem. Build and deliver that small thing fast, then iterate.

ozim
0 replies
7h25m

Not naive - it is only disappointing level of insanity that still gets through and some business people like PMs or BAs are there to shield devs yes - but there are also vast amounts that don't do their job properly and all turns into basically game of "Chinese whispers" or "human telephone". I don't need someone to copy over what customer wrote from e-mail to Jira that is not what the job is about.

zarathustreal
0 replies
10h52m

Such a flippant dismissal yet so little consideration given.. ironically, the reality of what you’re doing is exactly what you’re accusing OP of: assuming a state of victimhood.

Shouting “that’s the job!” when it is ostensibly not the job (whatever your experience of the “reality” of it may be) is really an implied assertion that you must make concessions in your work arrangement regardless of the explicit agreement you make with your employer when accepting a job.

The desperation to communicate this comes across, to me, as a cry for help with asserting yourself in the workplace. In my experience this is a result of a power imbalance in the employment relationship. Unfortunately the reasons for this imbalance are often extremely complex but some generic, potentially not helpful, advice for anyone in common scenarios I’ve seen would be:

1. Improve your skillset. It will help your (implied) negotiating power when they start adding more meetings or pulling you off task

2. Learn how to politely assert yourself in a work environment. We’re all playing games of imperfect information and light assertiveness and confidence can put an adversary in a position where they can’t afford to assume you’re wrong (in the moment)

3. Know what you’re signing up for and be candid about what you’re bringing to the table. If you’ve spent the last four years in intensive study of algorithms and data structures, be candid about the fact that you’re taking the job to solve computational problems. Let them know ahead of time that you’re not another head to count or butt to fill a seat.

yen223
0 replies
16h24m

The charitable take is that this is a way to tell architects what life as a programmer is like.

(I 100% believe that if an architect read this article, their takeaway would be that programmers have it too easy)

is_true
0 replies
9h31m

The architect would be a PM in the real world. The guys working on site are always fixing issues with the design. And owners always want some changes.

The thing with the construction industry is that the user can "see" the frontend before, it would be like if you build the frontend and when the user accepts you build the backend.

al_borland
0 replies
7h30m

I’d be more accepting of these things from outside clients. I am less accepting of it from internal stakeholders.

scott_w
9 replies
10h47m

Articles (and the ensuing comments) always miss something major: construction and software are not even remotely the same thing.

For example, in construction you have:

* Architect (designs the building)

* Designer (prepares the technical drawings)

* Engineer (signs off the drawings)

* Manufacturing (makes building parts to the drawings)

* Surveyors (make sure the land can be built on)

* Builders (build the building)

* Roofers (put the roof on)

* Site managers (make sure the builders build the building)

* Building Control (government sign-off on the built building)

* Sparkies (put wires in)

* Plumbers (put the pipes in)

* Plasterers (put the plaster on the walls)

* Painters/decorators (finish the walls)

* Fitters (put everything else in)

All of these are separate businesses and I'm sure I've missed some things, or misnamed others. And, despite a number of people being legally liable for shoddy work, we still see things like Grenfell happen.

Software engineering, by contrast:

* Product manager (figures out what to make)

* Designer (figures out how it should work/look)

* Software engineer (writes the code)

* Auditor (compliance with relevant standards e.g. PCI DSS or SOC2)

There's also a bunch of stuff supporting that but I left them out because I'd add 5x more on the construction side.

My point isn't to say who has it harder, or which field is "better," just to point out that the fields aren't comparable at all.

rrgok
3 replies
8h3m

Finally someone who sees for what a shit of a job Software Engineer has become. You can see my post/comment history here on HN, that I argue exactly this. We are doing too much.

scott_w
2 replies
6h30m

That's not what I said at all. See my last sentence:

My point isn't to say who has it harder, or which field is "better," just to point out that the fields aren't comparable at all.
rrgok
1 replies
44m

I'm not saying which is harder or who has it better either. I just pointed out that Software Engineers are doing a lot of things outside of their scope. Perfect example is the one you brought up.

scott_w
0 replies
5m

Which example?

ourmandave
1 replies
10h10m

This, honestly. I just read a quote (that I can't find) along the lines of, "no one asks a builder to remove the second floor and install a pool in the basement."

TremendousJudge
0 replies
5h49m

You'd be surprised.

Izkata
1 replies
6h26m

Sparkies (put wires in)

Is this industry jargon, a translation, something else I'm not aware of? I'd think this was "electricians".

scott_w
0 replies
6h9m

Yeah, its “electrician,” I suspect it’s a British localism because I learned it from my dad (who was a sparkie before he retired).

Viliam1234
0 replies
30m

Software engineering, by contrast:

I thought it was:

* Managers (they manage)

* More managers (they also manage)

* Even more managers (probably also manage, not sure though)

* One full-stack developer assigned 20% to this project (has meetings with managers, writes the specification, writes the code, tests the application, deploys the application, provides 24/7 on-call support)

kmoser
9 replies
16h55m

Also, I am a visual and tactile person so I would need you to build a mock-up of this house in advance, preferably 1:1 scale, and fully functional so I can see how it will function. If I am dissatisfied with any aspect of the house, I expect you to rebuild it from scratch, only faster since you have already had practice building it once before, so how hard could it be to build it again while incorporating my changes?

6510
7 replies
16h23m

Odd that no one mentioned my favorite?

The house must be rebuild in the same location while I'm using it and the transition to the new house must be seamless. The garage must be rebuild with the car in it, the kitchen floor and counter top must be replaced while the dishwasher and the oven are running, I must be able to shower and stay in my tub during the bath room replacement, you must rebuild the bedroom discreetly while I'm having sex, toilets must be rebuild while in use.

Groxx
3 replies
15h25m

"hot-swappable toilets" was not a mental picture I expected to have today

ZaoLahma
2 replies
13h6m

Let's hope they at least allow you to wait for a flush to pipe so you won't have to carry over the user's transaction.

datadrivenangel
1 replies
4h39m

Zero downtime is a requirement.

ZaoLahma
0 replies
1h0m

Well shit.

timeon
0 replies
12h47m

Not sure what your point is. It is called reconstruction.

Also architects often need to adjust design while building is under construction.

Deploying code is not comparable to what you have described.

mikeocool
0 replies
6h49m

I imagine for a lot of businesses, if they could do this with physical space, it would be huge for them.

The restaurant business is so low margin, most restaurants simply can't renovate -- even if you can afford the actual cost of renovation, unless you are already wildly successful you'll never make up the money lost for being closed for weeks, you have to fire and rehire your entire staff, and you'll piss off customers by being closed when they expect you to be open. It makes more sense to simply close the restaurant after a few years and open a new one.

jabits
0 replies
15h22m

Hilarious

Groxx
0 replies
16h42m

What is this, a house for ants? How am I expected to live in this?

Scale it up! It's already built, so I expect it on the lot tomorrow.

demondemidi
6 replies
17h19m

The person who wrote this doesn't know any building architects who serve the wealthy.

Rich people who want custom homes often want to design it themselves, and then get extremely annoyed when confronted with the reality of basic design principles, usability, materials, structural integrity, etc. And then like to change their plans last minute once they actually start to see it framed in (assuming they don't freak out because they've never seen framing before and don't realize it isn't done yet). Or perhaps one of their rich friends made a glib comment or a jab while being shown the foundation and now the customer wants both their kids to have their own recital hall, because one isn't enough.

Another stellar example: someone wanted a garage put above their kitchen because they wanted to park their ferrari next to their bedroom on the second floor. Damn the exhaust fumes.

angarg12
3 replies
16h44m

someone wanted a garage put above their kitchen because they wanted to park their ferrari next to their bedroom on the second floor.

You mean this guy?

https://youtu.be/Us8mDKUaX2M?si=qnrckuGLyWzoFNAe&t=1515

maximus-decimus
0 replies
13h8m

I love how he's saying it's convenient because that gives you 2 parking spots... as if they can't afford to have room for a second parking space that doesn't block the car you put on the second floor while there's a tonne of empty space just in front of the garage door lol.

demondemidi
0 replies
6h7m

It's like living in a mall, I guess i'm just a boring plebe who likes cozy spaces.

defrost
0 replies
16h35m

At the time, aspirationally, maybe.

The next morning, after they sobered up, more like this guy: https://youtu.be/fqgrOl1q9p8?t=5

wodenokoto
0 replies
11h39m

You don’t have to be designing a Villa for a rich individual for those kind of things. Some of the stories I’ve heard in Dubai are ridiculous.

Fix, Developer asks landscape architects to draw a pool deck on the podium of a tower under construction. Landscape asks engineers about floor thickness and load numbers and are told that the podium, as completed, cannot carry a pool. Apartments have already been sold, with brochures showing pictures of a pool deck. Nobody told engineering that they had to spec for a pool let alone where on the podium.

Another story I’ve heard: core of residential tower has been completed to 20 out of 40 stories when developer gets a bright idea and approach an architectural firm to design a rooftop pool, as if that’s not something that required planning in terms of foundation, structure or where to put maintenance equipment.

rurban
0 replies
13h58m

An architect friend of mine had a special job for special clients, who turned out to be Saudi wives. They had good ideas, but their ideas changed every month with the newest update of their architectural magazine. So she went down to Riyadh or Mecca every other month to explain them the details of the design involved. The crazy thing is, that there were a couple of wives involved, not just one. And a couple of new high gloss architectural magazines.

A lot of models had to be built. But this is common. Hitler as another rich nightmare customer was famous for adoring Speer's models, and changing his mind constantly. He always knew better.

cortesoft
6 replies
16h35m

This sounds like a perfect example of a "cocktail party idea", with programmers thinking they know how other fields operate. I am sure an architect could write a similar post about programmers, with just as many false assumptions and misunderstandings about what the job actually takes.

https://danluu.com/cocktail-ideas/

endofreach
2 replies
16h11m

That would actually be a very, very interesting read.

krisoft
1 replies
12h33m

I don't have an article for you, but this is a topic I discussed with a friend who works as an architect of buildings. His main points were:

- programming is way easier because you get instantaneous feedback[1]. When he has an idea it will take sometimes tens of years for it to be realised. (if ever)

- the rules they operate under are not deterministic. They might design a building which is totally fine under one interpretation of the regulations and fails under an other. Sometimes what actually changed is not even the interpretation of the rules, but things outside of their control such as the political favours of the investors behind the building. If plan reviewers want to find some problem with your thing they will.

- builders replace materials and techniques often, sometimes even without discussing it with the architects. In programming you don't have to worry that your compiler cheapens out and replaces the doubles you declared with single floats.

- With programming if you don't like what you made you just rewrite it[1]. With his line of work once you know know that something is wrong it is way too late to change anything. Heaps of money has been spent and years are passed. Because of reputational and liability reasons this leads to a mindset where you are unlikely to accept that there was ever anything wrong with your idea thus architects become solidly set in their thinking.

- Everything he thinks is mediated through layers and layers of other people. If something goes wrong he can always blame the builder, or the owner or the occupier. This leads to even less honest self-reflection.

1: A common theme in all of this is that what he has experience with is very small scale coding. He knows that a compiler provides instant feedback on syntax errors and he thinks that is all there to software development. We who work in the industry know that feedback loops are not always that fast in Software Engineering , but those parts of the work were not experienced by him.

AdamN
0 replies
12h12m

Interesting feedback. As you rightly point out, in major tech projects most of these advantages to software don't hold up (determinism, rapid feedback loops, etc...). So I guess everybody is squeezed no matter where they are :-)

YetAnotherNick
1 replies
16h15m

I am sure an architect could write a similar post about programmers

Yes and I would like it.

eastbound
0 replies
15h29m

Yes. Try justifying jobs paid 700€/day every day for years.

globular-toast
0 replies
5h13m

Everyone's job is easy apart from mine.

Ygg2
4 replies
17h20m

Honestly not complicated enough.

PPPS. House will might be sent to the moon or Mariana trench. Make sure it can sustain these pressures.

PPPPS. This goes for trailer as well. Additionally we need a plan to deploy it on a neutron star.

kmoser
2 replies
16h53m

Assume it will be a spherical house in a vacuum. Except when it isn't.

Ygg2
1 replies
7h50m

Assume sphere is also a square. Not a cube. A Square.

datadrivenangel
0 replies
4h30m

Square sphere is requirement. Still sphere even though non-circular.

nicewarmvalley
0 replies
9h49m

Mariana trench is easy, make a thicker hull. Now try hot patching a house in interstellar space built after the 1977 housing standard.

hooby
3 replies
15h21m

That's a very funny take - but I wonder how architects feel about it, because I'm pretty sure that there is similar stuff happening when designing houses...

The biggest difference though probably is, that the architect who creates the blue prints - will not be involved in the actual construction work. Therefore the blue-print (which the customer signed off on) has to be ground truth.

brudgers
2 replies
15h7m

It’s similar, because clients are clients.

But with a good chance of not being paid.

And with direct personal liability that cannot be shielded with a corporate entity;

and professional license requirements;

and building codes enforced by governments…

And of course if you fuck up, people may die.

The article captures another aspect of architecture as well: ordinary people assume living in a house and using buildings gives them informed opinions on architectural matters. But that’s just people.

moooo99
1 replies
14h31m

But isn’t the risk you’re describing mostly tied to the actual engineer implementing or adjusting the design the architects come up with?

No clue how that works in the US, but here most of the calculations are being done by an engineer with a different education than an architect.

brudgers
0 replies
7h59m

No.

doubloon
3 replies
17h13m

most of any job is listening to people. doesnt matter if you are a president or a janitor. people want things but they dont know exactly how or why, most of all they just want to feel that you have listened to them about their problem. and then done your best to help them.

waynesonfire
0 replies
16h56m

yes, i need to feel heard. thanks for the specs and see you at tomorrows standup!

jq-r
0 replies
12h43m

While this sounds nice in a vacuum, I don't think that the reality for many people over here.

Its usually: "our product needs X, get it done". You can listen to that manager for hours or days, use your psychiatrist hat to extract more useful info, renegotiate requrements etc, but that doesn't save you from probably weeks or months of just hard work.

I would understand if one is a contact person for some account. And then you listen to your client as best you can, write up a doc/ticket/whatever for someone else to deal with that.

A janitor who listens most of the time isn't really a good janitor so this is much less universal than it sounds.

bruce511
0 replies
16h53m

This 100%. We've discovered, especially in small customers, it's worth finding out if the payer, and user, are the same person.

In some places the new house is being built for folk who are happy with the old house. And if the users don't want to change they can sabotage the project away. It's worth finding out, before any money is spent, just how devoted to thd project the owner is.

As in, if push comes to shove, who gets fired, the architect or the monther-in-law?

croes
3 replies
16h3m

Architects can't simply release a patch or update after they delivered, so programmers have it better unless you program for NASA or medical devices.

Same with any craftsmanship. If they botch something they have to start all over again, sometimes they can't.

Compared to that being a programmer is easy.

osigurdson
1 replies
12h5m

> Architects can't simply release a patch or update after they delivered

Some changes are trivial, others are like moving to a new standard for railroad widths.

arethuza
0 replies
10h18m

It's easy - just like changing which side of the road a country drives on - phase it so that cars change over one day and lorries the next and buses the day after that....

fendy3002
0 replies
15h53m

counterpoint: because it can be patched / updated, client will want it patched / updated. The worse thing on programming, it's hard to estimate a task because it's very dependent on the software architecture.

If we're talking about building, you'll know the estimates of adding a sink on a specific room / floor vs adding another floor on the roof. Both need to be reviewed by the blueprints and whether the foundation support another floor if we're talking the later.

In software it should be similar, however most of the time management isn't aware of the software architecture and the challenge to make the change. Adding a button to change some value may take either hours to days depending on the architecture, same with adding a sink may take days to months depending on the plumbing blueprint.

Which is why in software, sometimes management ask you to add 50 floors to an existing 100 floors building and simultaneously change all the electricity placements on all floors, in under 3 months.

spintin
1 replies
14h51m

The biggest thing missing from this is you have to build a brick house with a hammer and nails or a wooden house with mortar.

The premise of micro-services where lost in complexity, the whole point always was "you should be able to select the tools you like".

AndyPa32
0 replies
13h34m

As an architect and tech consultant I mostly advise against going all in on microservices. And when I do recommend them, tooling is never part of the argument. Organizational and team structures are.

rovek
1 replies
15h58m

Fun but I prefer the previous version about a bridge building team

https://www.stilldrinking.org/programming-sucks - Second section

charles_f
0 replies
5h23m

This one predates it by 20y, do I don't think it qualifies as a "previous version".

But thanks for sharing, it's quite fun

ako
1 replies
14h34m

It’s wrong to think programming is similar to construction. Creating new products consists of a product design phase and a product manufacturing phase. The first part finishes with a precise and tested design (so probably needs (digital) prototypes that can be tested), manufacturing just creates those design with as accurate as possible.

Architects and software engineers are both part of the product design phase, software engineers deliver the first version of a product that can be tested (that can include multiple iteration, and new versions of an already finished version of the product).

Product manufacturing in IT mostly consists of getting a copy of the product to the end user, either by creating an actual copy, or by allowing all users to have access to the final version created by product design.

Software engineering is part of design, you’re part of getting the requirements and design final, don’t expect just to manufacture according to finalized designs.

Architect simply look at the bigger picture design, components and interfaces, whereas engineers have a smaller focus. Architect are usually just engineers with more experience so they have more experience with the bigger picture design.

osigurdson
0 replies
12h9m

> Architect are usually just engineers with more experience

I don't think that is true at all. These are distinct fields.

MountainMan1312
1 replies
19h25m

As a handyman who does small repairs and remodeling, this is exactly how it is.

vrosas
0 replies
17h21m

Yeah I’m on the client side of this now with a new home, trying to vaguely describe a vision to contractors who have great questions about problems and decisions I hadn’t even thought about. I’m sorry for myself.

MASNeo
1 replies
16h18m

Further, please ensure strict privacy of anyone entering the house but at the same time allow for good communication among everyone.

Also, make sure only authorized people can enter or see what’s happening inside and keep everyone very safe from fires, physical harm or other people. Unfortunately, the safety must be accomplished without additional cost or restrictions in use.

jameshart
0 replies
7h29m

The house is also going to be located in a unincorporated neighborhood where crime is rampant and law enforcement can do nothing to help. The house must nevertheless be secure from vandalism, arson, theft, installation of listening devices, verbal abuse or assault of visitors, or access by terrorists or people on global sanctions lists. I don’t plan on buying any insurance, the police won’t investigate any wrongdoing, and I don’t plan on paying security guards. But the house has to be open to the public. The people who will attempt to abuse or assault the house range from gangs of bored teenagers, through organized crime gangs, up to the intelligence agencies and militaries of major hostile nations. Good luck.

websitescenes
0 replies
7h54m

This is a description of a poorly run process and lack of product management. Clients will ask for dumb stuff regardless if it’s a building or piece of software. It’s our job to educate and guide. If a client is un-guidable, then fire them!

tdudhhu
0 replies
13h12m

If you read the work of Christopher Alexander you will notice he is proposing a much leaner method for building.

For example: start by marking the position of the front door on the property and lay out the living room with sticks and wire so you can decide where you want to look at while sitting on your couch.

And I believe he was right. Building lean can be done but does not fit in the 'architectual way'.

swozey
0 replies
16h5m

If I had to spend the amount of time and consideration on every merge to main that an architect probably has to spend on every minor change that might lead to a safety or regulatory or, whatever else you can come up with had to, I'm sure I'd get absolutely no work done and be a ball of stress.

I'm incredibly grateful that I work on cattle not pets, or humans.

spzb
0 replies
9h31m

The entire house must be built on a cloud because clouds are cool. Clouds provide no structural stability and are completely inappropriate for this project so you'll need to build loads of scaffolding to hold everything together which should be concealed by the presence of the cloud.

sonpython
0 replies
9h58m

I use chatGPT4 to create the design you want.

https://i.imgur.com/EVIL8wg.png

smugma
0 replies
6h36m

This is also how actual architects feel about requirements given by their clients.

sidewndr46
0 replies
8h37m

This seems misplaced. My understanding is in most of the western world, architects can't actually design buildings anyways. They would need a PE for that, which they may not have. So instead they work with engineers and the process may more or less go as described. I have seen plenty of buildings that had last minute changes made, including jackhammering through the floors the minute the concrete had cured.

rurban
0 replies
14h14m

kommt hin. I worked both as professional architect and programmer.

Thanksfully, I could tame my SW clients, but heard enough stories of totally incapable PM's who accept such clients. But we also had similar "Bauherren", esp. in politics. German politicians are famous for demanding the "eierlegendewollmilchsau" in construction.

I even had specialized jobs to deal with such clients, such as e.g. in stage design. There was a whole SW VR project to be able to show the client his absurdities beforehand.

robertlagrant
0 replies
12h53m

At this time, for example, it is not appropriate to be choosing the color of the carpet. However, keep in mind that my wife likes blue.

This made me chuckle. Captures the mentality perfectly.

rightbyte
0 replies
13h33m

I used to laught at these joke chain mails. E.g. the "If programmer made cars" chain mail.

But the sad reality is that programming mispractices have spread like a plague to other engineering discliplines.

Even total BS like agile have been forced on other poor engineers in totally different sectors.

So programming didn't evolve into an engineering discipline, we brought everyone else down with us!

The royal we, as in The Man, by the way. I did nothing wrong. Leave me alone. :)

raldi
0 replies
16h16m

Also I expect you to mow the lawn every two weeks and replace roof shingles whenever necessary.

petre
0 replies
15h22m

If Architects had to work like this, you'd likely earn a reputation as a cheapskate and get the "sorry but we're busy with other projects" line, or get the design for a barn from some desperate junior architect.

ninetyninenine
0 replies
17h17m

There is merit in the opposite concept where programmers are working like architects/(other engineers outside of programming).

The problem is nobody cares about that style because although people die when a building falls, nobody dies when a program crashes.

At least most of the time, nobody dies.

nercury
0 replies
11h5m

Bytes aren't bricks. Reshuffling them from scratch after a smallest change is cheap and fast. Taking advantage of that is not stupid. Proper communication and work with client is a skill, and architects have to deal with stupid requests too!

If's fun little article, but is a bit short-sighted. Probably because otherwise it would not work.

mcapodici
0 replies
14h58m

Sounds like an episode of grand designs.

mattacular
0 replies
8h41m

It could have been me 15 years ago but these days I find this kind of attitude to be frankly very whiny.

Building software lends itself to change and iteration more readily than building in the physical world. As an industry or discipline, it is also vastly younger (and therefore immature) compared with eg. our shared knowledge of how to do construction projects that has developed over thousands of years. The realm of what is possible and impossible is also much different. A laypersons understanding of what goes into building a home versus building a web application are much different.

lr4444lr
0 replies
12h46m

Once "Agile" methodology effectively won in this industry, any hope of actually bringing software development into an "engineering" discipline was dead.

I'm not saying there aren't positives to doing things that way, but it's got a lot to do with why the satire of this article rings true.

lp4vn
0 replies
11h52m

Architecture is a kind of traditional professional that inherited its practices and methods from a time where there was a respect for the craftmanship that the activity requires.

Programming is a profession that, with the exception of a few early decades, practically started in the corporate world. Modern day development is what you can expect when companies have unchecked autonomy over a whole professional field.

That's why an abomination like scrum exists where you are guilty tripped everyday in dailys having to report what you have done even though management and your colleagues have access to your tickets with your logged hours and the code you have commited to the repository.

I love programming but the only thing that keeps me in the field today is the pay, the moment I start to earn less I leave the field and go to work in something else.

lasereyes136
0 replies
5h24m

Build software isn't like building physical things. Software and physical things operate under different constraints. All analogies are are wrong or off but some are insightful.

The insight here is that people expect things not based on reality but on desire. With architecture there is a process to give the architect leverage to say no to ridiculous requests, architects need to be licensed, which is hard to get.

We have no such leverage in IT so we get threatened with "do it or I will find someone that will" and businesses are always trying to find that cheaper someone or group of people that will do the work they have in their head on time, for a cheap budget, and without asking a lot of questions like "why do you think I would know something you didn't say or write down".

jillesvangurp
0 replies
15h8m

A common misconception with software architecture and software design is assuming that this is somehow separate from your program and something you create before you start programming. In most projects, this is limited to some preliminary scribbling on a whiteboard and some random musings in a wiki or issue tracker. But it used to be that people were very serious about waterfall and wasted lots of time on this.

But if you think about it, an architectural drawing for a building is essentially an executable recipe for building a house that the construction team uses to build it. I.e. it's actually very similar to a program. It tells the team of builders all they need to know to build the building.

In the software world, the blue prints actually are executable. That's the whole point. The job of programming is essentially just creating a very detailed blueprint in some language. The compiler/interpreter then generates the executable from this blue print. The only difference here is that we replaced the team of construction workers with another program the construction process is automated and does not involve any people.

This wasn't always the case, the word compiling refers to people stacking together punch cards in the right order. The first computers were humans flipping switches, doing calculations, and messing around with cables, punch cards and what not. The word debugging refers to removing actual live (or dead) bugs from circuitry. Writing a program used to mean creating a plan to task these people to do all these things. Having a plan for that is kind of crucial. Exactly like having an architecture blue print for a building is important. That's what a program is: a blueprint for creating/generating instructions that a computer can work with. Ada Lovelace, widely recognized as the first programmer, never even had access to a computer. She was designing software for a machine that did not yet exist. But she was a programmer and not an architect.

Having a separate program for producing the program just isn't a thing (well except for meta programming of course). Just like having a blue print for a blue print for a bridge or a building is not really a thing. There's just the blueprint. And just like programmers have to do a lot of problem solving while they create their blue prints (programs), architects have to do a lot of problem solving while they are creating their blueprints. It's this problem solving that make their jobs hard and unpredictable. Once you have the blueprint, things get relatively straightforward and predictable.

But before that, buildings are just as risky and unpredictable as software programs are. You have to deal with requirements, budgets, regulations, flaky customers, etc. This can get really complicated and risky. That's why large engineering projects run over budget so often. And ironically, agile engineering is actually a thing too now. E.g. SpaceX iterates on their rockets rather than designing them years in advance: real world engineering is learning from software engineering.

issafram
0 replies
15h55m

He was being too nice

isoprophlex
0 replies
12h55m

"If you tell me how much time a task will take, please don't specify the time in hours or days, but use these made up 'points' that mean different things to different people"

Also, many commenters saying this is in bad taste, badmouthing architects or assuming a victimized 'hurr programming is so hard' stance. I read it differently, as a critique of the software industry itself, about how we're utterly unable to get our clients to understand the realities of our work.

Noone in their right mind would ask for a house with 2-to-42 bedrooms. Yet the average IT worker somehow accepts this as normal in their software work. It would behoove us to get our clients to understand this, and not delegate that task to the scrumlords... who generally only make things more confusing and complex.

hn30000
0 replies
3h22m

Ironically, much of this sounds like a high-end residential client. At least in software you get paid decently. Source: have worked in arch and tech.

elteto
0 replies
17h4m

Oh so this guy has a spec? Must be nice.

dkarl
0 replies
17h35m

If?

collyw
0 replies
6h5m

And can you build me a small shed just to make sure you can do your work before I hire you.
class3shock
0 replies
1h47m

This makes me want to write a post, "If programmers had to work like mechanical engineers". There is much overlap, dealing with changing requirements, fickle clients, struggles with realities of moving from design to production, etc. but imagine if a program crashing had the same legal, monetary, and personal safety implications as a cars brakes failing?

To put it another way, there's a reason Toyota has an order of magnitude more employees but a comparable networth to Adobe and it's not because doing things in the real world is easier.

charles_f
0 replies
5h26m

So first off, this is almost 30yo, predates agile. You can tell that, because the bullshit detector reveals only 3 words.

A lot of people are saying "construction and software are very different". This is fair, but this is not how I read it. The point being conveyed is not that the methods used in software don't make sense in construction, or that we're using the wrong method in software because construction does it differently, but to outline the outlandishness of certain expectations in software and of software devs (extreme flexibility, ridiculous cost, taking in the needs of the planet, doing all the jobs) that, dare I say, didn't change much in the 29y since this was written.

That these are bytes and those are bricks don't change that thise expectations are unrealistic, and that post makes that point in a funny way.

bmitc
0 replies
10h32m

This is missing "and your life is made a living hell by having to use other architects' unfinished work and without blueprints".

bentobean
0 replies
13h9m

This, but each sentence as a separate Slack DM with its own corresponding “Whack Whack” sound.

aorloff
0 replies
17h2m

We are not far off from the point where these kinds of constraint sets can produce designs. JitX is doing this for circuit boards. Houses are probably simpler, although people are more complex about their home.

andy_ppp
0 replies
14h1m

Well, knowing an architect quite well they have exactly the same issues as we do of poor specifications that change, quite often due to unforeseen things on site. While a single person might be smart, people in general are idiots.

andrewstuart
0 replies
15h41m

It's a false analogy.

Programming has a lot more in common with portrait painting or sculpting than building something physical like a house.

It is very hard and expensive to change physical things, software is relatively easily comparatively to change. Because software is changeable and pliable, it is practical to not make all decisions in advance.

alibarber
0 replies
11h6m

Completely unrealistic. There's no way a developer would be allowed to talk to the client.

Semiapies
0 replies
15h26m

Also, I want it to do everything that this really cool house I saw does. But, I only want to pay for a day or two of labor in order to accomplish every feature that massive contruction project had, plus this one key feature that that house didn't have.

What? You can't do that? My husband/ son/ nephew/ gardener knows how to draw with pencils, I can have them do it if you won't see reason!

NoPicklez
0 replies
15h37m

What is this post trying to achieve.

To me these "what it's like in comparison to x" post just try to exaggerate and overblow the Programmers life whilst downplaying an Architects.

Almost all of these points just illustrate that every project based profession has similar pain points.

It's also ignorant to assume you know what it's like to be an architect or what another profession is like for that matter unless you have worked in both fields.

MeImCounting
0 replies
15h25m

Having worked in construction/contracting I can say that architects usually get badmouthed on the jobsite for being totally ignorant of the actual intricacies of construction and finishing. Obviously this isnt always true but it still made me smile to see something that could be interpreted as a bit of goodhearted architect bashing on HN tonight.

LAC-Tech
0 replies
15h18m

I love it. Any more of these? I love 80s and 90s programming humour. Real programmers don't eat quiche, story of mel, etc.