I can see you’re frustrated by the downvotes and pushback you’ve received. It’s understandable to feel defensive when your viewpoint isn’t well-received. I appreciate you sharing your perspective, even if it goes against the majority opinion here.

Your points about the space shuttle program’s challenges are valid and worth discussing. It’s important to note the timeframes involved though. The shuttle was developed in the 1970s, well before agile methodologies emerged in the 1990s and 2000s.

Interestingly, one could argue that NASA may have used agile-like practices in the space shuttle program, even if they weren’t labeled as such at the time. However, I did a quick search and couldn’t find much concrete evidence to support this idea. It’s an intriguing area that might merit further research.

Regarding modern agile approaches, while no method is perfect, many organizations have found them helpful for improving flexibility and delivering value incrementally. NASA’s recent use of agile for certain projects shows they’re open to evolving their methods.

I’m curious to hear more about your thoughts on software development approaches for complex engineering projects. What do you see as the pros and cons of different methodologies? Your insights could add a lot to this discussion.

Edgy meme: agile bad

NASA: “Yep, we use agile” https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160006387/downloads/20160006387.pdf?attachment=true

Your comparison is interesting, but let’s consider some historical facts. The Apollo program, which successfully put humans on the moon, actually employed many principles we now associate with Agile methodologies.

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn’t a straightforward Waterfall process. NASA used frequent feedback (akin to daily Scrums), self-organizing teams, stable interfaces so that teams are an independent path to production, and iterative development cycles - core Agile practices. In fact, Mariana Mazzucato’s book Mission Economy provides fascinating insights into how the moon landing project incorporated elements remarkably similar to modern Agile approaches. Furthermore, here’s a NASA article detailing how Agile practices are used to send a rover to the moon: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160006387/downloads/20160006387.pdf?attachment=true

While it’s true that building rockets isn’t identical to software development, the underlying principles of flexibility, collaboration, and rapid iteration proved crucial to the missions’ success. Programs like the Apollo program adapted constantly to new challenges, much like Agile teams do today.

Regarding Kanban and Scrum, you’re right that they fall under the Agile umbrella. However, each offers unique tools that can be valuable in different contexts, even outside of software.

Perhaps instead of dismissing Agile outright for hardware projects, we could explore how its principles might be adapted to improve complex engineering endeavors. After all, if it helped us reach the moon and, decades later, send rovers to it, it might have more applications than we initially assume.

A friend of mine and I have gotten used to using it during our conversations. We do fast fact-checking or find a good first opinion regarding silly topics. We often find it faster than digging through search-engine results and interpreting scattered information. We have used it for thought experiments, intuitive or ELI5 explanations of topics that we don’t really know about, finding peer-reviewed sources for whatever it is that we’re interested in, or asking questions that operationalizing into effective search engine prompts would be harder than asking with natural language. We always always ask for citations and links, so that we can discard hallucinations.

It’s about time Instagram enshittifies in a grotesque way, grotesque enough for people to realize it’s shit (because it’s enshittified).

The article’s “valuing your time” argument is problematic in certain contexts. My brother has had so much trouble with his dual-boot (Windows and Linux). Yes, he could learn how to solve something in Linux every time a problem arises, but he also has to deliver his projects on time. Because of that, he mostly spends time on his Windows dual boot. Yeah, it sucks ethically and has its own pragmatic issues, but he has never had issues resolving dependencies or hunting down the most recent version that can actually be run in NixOS.

I don’t doubt these will become issues that will not be as problematic in the future, but right now my brother cannot use Linux reliably for his assignments.

This was posted in “nonpolitical_memes”, but how is this not political? The definition of politics can depend, but let’s take it to be something like “deciding how political goods will be allocated”. Deciding how resources will be allocated is political. Evaluating how resources are allocated is political. The fact that someone considers something evidently political as not political is political (search for “depoliticization” online).

What does politics mean to you? What do you understand by depoliticization?

That speech and the crowd’s reactions gave me the chills.

If people are here to receive recommendations, I’m preaching to the choir. But responding the question directly, a computer of my own. Being able to go online or work on digital stuff whenever I want to has changed my life for the better.

The book Influence by Cialdini not only talks about the levers of influence, but how to minimize their impact.

I love how you put it. I think the particular consequences of not making money quickly enough is pulling the plug in projects. Investors want money, not games.

I think I just exposed how expensive and rare I think kidney-stone treatments are…

Edit: clarity

Oh… I wonder how expensive using that bathtub is. Are they rare? Like, would almost any hospital have one?

You seem to be doing quite some things well. Maybe pay attention to your brushing? My dentist once had me brush my teeth in front of her and identified why in some teeth I’d consistently be clean and in others I’d consistently build plaque.

Her recommendations: brush from the gum to the tip of the tooth. Try to aim at the holes between teeth. Pay close attention to the part in front of your tongue, in your lower front teeth; that part can easily build plaque if you don’t use the tip of your brush well to get in the holes between your teeth.

1. I am scared of the amount of data that they hoard without being transparent with their code.

2. I am also scared of their contribution to hacker honey-pots by giving our data to American mass surveillance systems, something we learned with the Snowden leaks. I mention the honey pot because I assume you trust politicians and bureaucracies more than hackers. Right now there are NSA employees that can look at all of your Google data. While you may trust them, the fact is, they created a honey-pot for hackers. This is Bruce Schneier’s point.

3. I am scared of Google’s capacity to shape public opinion, usually to favor whoever pays the most money. This is Jaron Lanier’s point.

4. I am frustrated at how large they are, stifling competition. This is the point of the antitrust suits that have come up.

Sure, I like that there are cool people there working on Android and open standards for pictures and video. But I do not want to support a publicly owned company that will ultimately serve its investors. I do want to support institutions that are incentivized to care about something other than investors, institutions that are incentivized to care about where the world is going, about you and I.

I read ebooks 😢

Out of curiosity, what makes you say so?

Edit: Oh. Did a “Wooosh” happen to me right now? Are you being ironic and referring to the XKCD thing about how to make a secure password using words in phrases?

We all have thoughts in our head. They are the lenses through which we see reality.

Sometimes, we are aware of that. For example, we may realize we’re being prejudiced or that we’re being cranky because of our mood.

However, this uses up a lot of energy; our frontal lobe is very energy-hungry. So we spend most of the time thinking habitual thoughts and following habitual behaviors. We don’t realize we’re looking at reality through a lens. We assume we are simply looking at reality.

What I am wishing for is for people to constantly be aware that the way they are looking at reality depends on the lenses they have learned and habitually use.

Metacognition becomes routine for humans. We are able to better de-fuse from our thoughts, and recognize them not as reality but as thoughts about reality.

Could this backfire? Like, sure, no combustion engines, but that would be solved in the long run with electricity. But are there things I’m forgetting that would be critical? Like a chemical process for critical chemicals that requires explosions or something like that.