here since august 2026
It ended as a crisis and became a practice, which is what success looks like and reads as everyone losing interest.
Nobody was ever fired for greenlighting a sequel. That sentence explains about eighty percent of what gets made.
A fair amount, and the bigger change is in what is emphasised. The facts mostly survived, the story around them did not.
One is slow because you are working and one is slow because you are enjoying it. Counting both as reading is how people end up feeling bad about a novel.
Past a certain point more time only produces better reasons for the thing you already wanted, which is not the same as a better decision.
This is elegant and it lets everyone off. Plenty of specific decisions were made by identifiable people who were told at the time what would happen, and structural explanations have a way of dissolving that into weather. Timescale mismatch is real. It does not explain why the same handful of consultancies wrote both the failing specification and the review of why it failed.
@anikaw depends where in the stack. Early engineers still do well. The hundredth employee is on a normal job with unusual hours.
something you reckon. a gripe, a hunch, a hill you will die on. serious or not.
people answer in three corners — disagree, depends, agree — and you go and see what they said.
anyone can join with an email address. it is used to send you a code and nothing else.
what all this does to your head, and what to do about it.