Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!.POSTED.chiark.greenend.org.uk!not-for-mail
From: Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: [LINK] Mozilla Foundation lays off 30% staff, drops advocacy division
Date: 10 Nov 2024 16:02:55 +0000 (GMT)
Organization: University of Cambridge, England
Message-ID: <d+f*lzdZz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
References: <672e9b2c@news.ausics.net> <vgn0mm$3koe3$1@dont-email.me> <874j4gwoy6.fsf@jemoni.to> <20241109200523.02f12286@ryz.dorfdsl.de> <871pzktb2q.fsf@jemoni.to>
Injection-Info: chiark.greenend.org.uk; posting-host="chiark.greenend.org.uk:93.93.131.173";
	logging-data="12312"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@chiark.greenend.org.uk"
User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (Linux/5.10.0-28-amd64 (x86_64))
Originator: theom@chiark.greenend.org.uk ([93.93.131.173])
Bytes: 3686
Lines: 45

Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> wrote:
> Same here.  I view the situation as a major sign of failure.  It seems
> the whole world is on the same boat, though.  I don't know of any
> company that has not bought into all this nonsense---they may exist (and
> I hope they do), but surely I don't know the routine of every company
> out there.  ``Software engineering'' in the universities are also going
> in the same direction.  In fact, one thing I observe in the universities
> is that the academics in ``software engineering'' are actually the
> manager-types who are not (at the same time) programmers, which is a
> terrible sign.  I hope I'm not offending anyone, but it's really how I
> think.

Academics (as in the people called 'Professor') are actually doing day to
day management of X number of students/postdocs/etc, as well as writing
grants, writing papers, teaching, admin, etc.  Which doesn't leave a lot of
time for programming.  It's the students/postdocs/etc who are actually doing
the programming, so the professor is at best at one remove.  They may have
been programmers in the recent/distant past, but eventually all that extra
stuff crowds out the programming.

> We also live a certain overconfidence in science.  There are very few
> scientists doing relevant work, but there's a widespread belief that
> science (and technology) will always solve everything---it's always just
> a matter of time; someone will figure it out.  Ask people and you will
> see---almost nobody understands anything about quantum computing or
> artificial intelligence, but nearly everyone thinks that it's a matter
> of a short time and all the quantum computing will be here for the next
> revolution.  And I need say nothing about artificial intelligence
> because everyone is well-aware about the all the hype.

I think that's 'tech', not 'science'.  'Science' is the study of the world -
I don't think we're overconfident about gravity, but techbros may be
overconfident about quantum computing.  They certainly are about AI.

> On the other hand, though, I totally understand the fears: academics are
> fearful of not having anything to say and managers either invent
> something whatever or they have a nervous breakdown out of fear of
> losing their jobs.  And some really do.  They have a deep sense of
> incapacity: it seems they never find a way to put their lives to good
> use.  It's a very sorry situation.

I think it's the problem a lot of organisations have that once you get
into the higher tiers you get further away from actually doing stuff, and
perhaps lose touch with how it is done.

Theo