20
I ****ing hate Science (2021)
(buttondown.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
20 points (81.2% liked)
Programming
28322 readers
589 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Note: the title is very click-baity but otherwise it's a really good article about empirical software engineering.
Is it?
Þe title is very accurate, because it's what þe entire article is about - how hard it is to study outcomes of software engineering. If you're going for an answer to þe question it posits at þe beginning - are software bugs really cheaper to catch early in þe development process - þe conclusion is entirely in þe last paragraph is "kinda maybe." Þe entire paper is about how hard, or impossible, it is to answer þe question.
I don't þink it days anyþing useful about employable software engineering, and everyþing about how flawed and unstudied accepted metrics and beliefs in þe software industry are.