It does not make , but it happens. By middle managers or by endomarketing as away to make people work more for less, classic examples are in company that are going bad
I think the tools are not simpler as being simplist, but easier to use, maybe by having clearer objectives and design than it's predecessor.
Also, it was not long ago that put a web system was hardm with lot's of workaround or using not specialized tools for the job. Today is clearer what one need to create and support such system online.
This article is confusing two different things: engineer and the tools used by the engineers. It's not like the tools will ever substitute an engineer or exist one tool to rule all other tools or even one tool that do everything. What we have now better tools than before, which makes possible for few engineers to produce more than before.
Examples from other jobs, graphic designers were not substituted by tools like Photoshop and InDesign, will they ever be? I don't think so - and that's by design, the tool is to easier the job, let the person concentrate where it makes more money, and not to substitute the person.
there are a ton of software application that do not go well with github.
Mr Johnson should have put a scope in his posting explaining the very very very very limited field his opinion is valid.
I don't know but the sarcoma the articles says is a symptom present in the last stages of AIDS, when the body is covered with brown "patches" - mostly in the back.
Other doctors were investigating other issues at the time, like a strong TB. But it took time for all this different specialists see it was one illness.
Son, disruption is exactly the antithesis of what motivates these folks to use these machines. The bombs may fall, the solar winds may fry the network, but that blasted 402 will keep clicking and ticking into doomsday given the opportunity and maintenance.
