1. 5
  1. 6

    An excellent rant with many truths inside. I am particularly taken with the phrase “Lust For Engineering”. It is a widespread lust that causes ruination by elevating the developer’s pleasure over the user’s (invisible, ignored) pain, a lust that fetishises the act of development so much that it rejects accessibility and progressive enhancement as ‘unnecessary’.

    • The Web That Was, a place of chaos and malleability […] required acknowledgement of variety and empathy with the infinity of technology and human combinations.
    • [React is marketed to programmers as a New Way to write websites, and this takes root]
    • Good aspects of this movement (such as the design systems community, “Composition over bespoke design”, excellent testing of components) get lost behind the Lust For Engineering.
    1. 3

      While I’m sympathetic to the issues outlined in the post, I’m marking it as off-topic, for the following reasons.

      There’s no background. The author mentions “Reactgate”, which is probably not the Reactgate of 2016. Searching for “#reactgate” on Twitter returns 2 hits after 2016.

      The author states

      I’m not going to try and describe the events that led to these particular events - at the time I was happily off Twitter and am dependent on reconstructions of the whole thing.

      This statement, without any help in the form of references, marks this post as speaking to those already in the know. While probably of interest to those, it gives us, the audience of this site, not much to go on.

      1. 4

        I disagree. The “Reactgate” parts of the article are probably the least significant. What’s more significant is the timeline of how React got as popular as it did, and why that’s been bad for the industry and the state of the profession(s). It also draws a causal line between bad social and political views and bad taste in computing system design, which I think is fascinating. This article deserves to be read by everyone.

        1. 3

          For my sins I have stumbled upon a timeline detailing this situtation (via this tweet).

      2. 2

        The core argument/timeline of this essay I agree with: React got made by neophilic devs, in turn Facebook used this as agitprop, the industry decided to normalize this because it helped decreased costs by moving software towards widget production.

        The other interstitial critique I think is going to drive off the people that probably would benefit most from reading the rest of the essay. Their blog, their voice, their deal–but for anybody else seeking to explain tech history maybe don’t push sexist/racist/feminist analysis so hard or if you do try to section it off by itself so it can be regarded more easily.