The author argues that failed software projects are nonetheless beneficial:
Their development employs many bureaucrats, consultants and contractors and their expenditure supports an even larger number of people throughout society.
... by the same argument I should stroll around the city and burn some cars, thereby offering employment to many firefighters, car producers, actuaries and all their suppliers.
The point about ever-expanding bureaucracies is well noted however. Perhaps it is our duty to design really bad programming languages and methodologies, to sell them to government organisations and similar bureaucracies in order to drive their likelihood of success even lower. Reminds me of the true purpose of Ada ... http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/sigplannotices/gigo-1997-0...
Yes, but let's be fair, this is an incidental parenthetical to the main point, which is that the true value of these failed projects comes from the fact that the projects never increase the efficiency of the bureaucracy. If you simply cut that paragraph the essay is, if anything, improved, demonstrating it's not a critical point.
Their development employs many bureaucrats, consultants and contractors and their expenditure supports an even larger number of people throughout society.
... by the same argument I should stroll around the city and burn some cars, thereby offering employment to many firefighters, car producers, actuaries and all their suppliers.
The point about ever-expanding bureaucracies is well noted however. Perhaps it is our duty to design really bad programming languages and methodologies, to sell them to government organisations and similar bureaucracies in order to drive their likelihood of success even lower. Reminds me of the true purpose of Ada ... http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/sigplannotices/gigo-1997-0...