IMO it's a bit more nuanced than what the author portrays it as.
IMO it's a bit more nuanced than what the author portrays it as. Broadly, software used to be much worse on the micro-level but better on the macro-level i.e. architecture. Since it was much harder to make stuff, you really had to architect it well or otherwise it would simply fall apart. For example in assembler you need discipline in your calling conventions, layout and so on, otherwise it just corrupted, you needed to follow sensible naming conventions otherwise it degenerated into unreadable label spaghetti and so on. Nowadays it's the other way around, the micro level is so much better due to libraries, code reuse, LLMs and better languages/tools, you can use highly sophisticated data structures and functions at your fingertips. In exchange, you can afford to skimp on architecture because computers are fast anyway, and the programming languages don't let you make a huge mess. (Most don't have unstructured goto/jumps, can't corrupt memory accidentally, etc.) However, this has the cost of making larger programs a nightmare to maintain and systems suffering from a "death of thousand cuts" i.e. on the micro level all is well but when you look at the entire system it's a sprawling unreliable mess. This is where rewrites often happen ;)
Posted by Pannoniae on Oct 27, 2026, 12:00 PM
Tags
Related issues
- In the UK Amazon have now raised the price of general shipping to be 2/3 the price of a months prime subscription.
- Credit where credit is due, critics claiming "[Apple device] is too expensive for something that just does [basic function]" have been pr...
- I like to buy music.
- Meet K-Claw.
- Fable is way too expensive for basic software stuff.
- [Meta] Abnormal Codex usage/quota depletion and usage-accounting inconsistencies — cross-report tracker
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.4,000 issues0 comments
pricing (SaaS)
IMO it's a bit more nuanced than what the author portrays it as.
NewIn the UK Amazon have now raised the price of general shipping to be 2/3 the price of a months prime subscription.
Credit where credit is due, critics claiming "[Apple device] is too expensive for something that just does [basic function]" have been pr...
I like to buy music.
Meet K-Claw.
Fable is way too expensive for basic software stuff.
[Meta] Abnormal Codex usage/quota depletion and usage-accounting inconsistencies — cross-report tracker
[FEATURE] Passkey (WebAuthn) sign-in for Claude accounts, across every surface
IMO it's a bit more nuanced than what the author portrays it as.
IMO it's a bit more nuanced than what the author portrays it as. Broadly, software used to be much worse on the micro-level but better on the macro-level i.e. architecture. Since it was much harder to make stuff, you really had to architect it well or otherwise it would simply fall apart. For example in assembler you need discipline in your calling conventions, layout and so on, otherwise it just corrupted, you needed to follow sensible naming conventions otherwise it degenerated into unreadable label spaghetti and so on. Nowadays it's the other way around, the micro level is so much better due to libraries, code reuse, LLMs and better languages/tools, you can use highly sophisticated data structures and functions at your fingertips. In exchange, you can afford to skimp on architecture because computers are fast anyway, and the programming languages don't let you make a huge mess. (Most don't have unstructured goto/jumps, can't corrupt memory accidentally, etc.) However, this has the cost of making larger programs a nightmare to maintain and systems suffering from a "death of thousand cuts" i.e. on the micro level all is well but when you look at the entire system it's a sprawling unreliable mess. This is where rewrites often happen ;)
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.