Links to referenced books can be found in the video description. Link to Fred Brooks' original article "No Silver Bullet Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering": ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1663532 Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet
Systems Engineering is got to be the most difficult way to solve problems but the most effective. This is because "Systems" are of the highest order when it comes to the creation of things, which is just a basic fundamental in defining "Engineering". So, the thinking should be toward the lowest order of creating things which is the basic unit of a thing, be it "atom" or "cell" or anything at the very foundational level. Thank You. My understanding of what was discussed towards solving problems.
Tools do not define success, they only progress our reaching a solution to a problem. So, it is about the understanding of the problem and the way we use the tools to solve the problem. We are not trying to solve problems using the tools better because new, better tools become crafted later on, which helps us to progress faster and better in our solution to the problem.
13:30 Iteration isn't enough though... you might get stuck in a local maxima. You need broader knowledge and synthesis to know how far back down a mountain you will need to descent, i.e., how fundamental your error is.
If I had to summarize, Modern Software Engineering presents what I call as the "Dual Challenge": Embracing New (& often complex) architectures leveraging Digital technology
I mostly agree with Dave on the subject of technology specific books... but there's always a couple of exceptions to the rule.... I've always thought Douglas Crockford's "the Good Parts" was vital reading if you're a JS developer or not just because of the ideas it smuggles across in it's technology specific text.
Links to referenced books can be found in the video description.
Link to Fred Brooks' original article "No Silver Bullet Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering":
ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1663532
Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet
Amazing conversation between professionals. Loved how open they spoke. Great video🦾🦾
J
.., kgtgx
u
LgSa byra b big a CD
Systems Engineering is got to be the most difficult way to solve problems but the most effective. This is because "Systems" are of the highest order when it comes to the creation of things, which is just a basic fundamental in defining "Engineering". So, the thinking should be toward the lowest order of creating things which is the basic unit of a thing, be it "atom" or "cell" or anything at the very foundational level. Thank You. My understanding of what was discussed towards solving problems.
Loved the discussion and banter between experienced software engineers passionate about the subject. Thank you.
Great talk, personally i find reducing complexity always works in software development, no matter the context
This was good to watch
Tools do not define success, they only progress our reaching a solution to a problem. So, it is about the understanding of the problem and the way we use the tools to solve the problem. We are not trying to solve problems using the tools better because new, better tools become crafted later on, which helps us to progress faster and better in our solution to the problem.
Good Video
13:30 Iteration isn't enough though... you might get stuck in a local maxima. You need broader knowledge and synthesis to know how far back down a mountain you will need to descent, i.e., how fundamental your error is.
If I had to summarize, Modern Software Engineering presents what I call as the "Dual Challenge":
Embracing
New (& often complex) architectures leveraging Digital technology
While keeping
Release cycles short
Such a sincere opening :).
I mostly agree with Dave on the subject of technology specific books... but there's always a couple of exceptions to the rule.... I've always thought Douglas Crockford's "the Good Parts" was vital reading if you're a JS developer or not just because of the ideas it smuggles across in it's technology specific text.
there is no 10x !
... but a lot 0.1x