this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
762 points (91.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

19623 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 226 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I think this is a bit disingenuous. There’s no customer interaction in these panels.

So waterfall would be:

Customer says they want to go to Mars.

You spend years building a rocket capable of going to Mars, draining all the company budget in the process.

Customer then clarifies they actually meant they wanted to go to Mars, Pennsylvania, USA - not the planet!

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 37 points 5 months ago

Also the strip stops midway through as Waterfall was an invented thing just for a paper. And during your UP work you actually had the customer put in that input and hence it was like in this cartoon strip.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 164 points 5 months ago (6 children)

Waterfall method: talk about building a rocket for 5 years, build the rocket, rocket needs to be totally redesigned because we forgot to put a place for people to go - massive change reqeust, build new version. Project Delay: 27 years

Agile Method: a rocket is not software - do not use Agile

Kanban - kanban is agile

Scrum - scrum . . is also Agile. What are you doing, go back and do the waterfall one

[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 41 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Your comparison is interesting, but let's consider some historical facts. The Apollo program, which successfully put humans on the moon, actually employed many principles we now associate with Agile methodologies.

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't a straightforward Waterfall process. NASA used frequent feedback (akin to daily Scrums), self-organizing teams, stable interfaces so that teams are an independent path to production, and iterative development cycles - core Agile practices. In fact, Mariana Mazzucato's book Mission Economy provides fascinating insights into how the moon landing project incorporated elements remarkably similar to modern Agile approaches. Furthermore, here's a NASA article detailing how Agile practices are used to send a rover to the moon: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160006387/downloads/20160006387.pdf?attachment=true

While it's true that building rockets isn't identical to software development, the underlying principles of flexibility, collaboration, and rapid iteration proved crucial to the missions' success. Programs like the Apollo program adapted constantly to new challenges, much like Agile teams do today.

Regarding Kanban and Scrum, you're right that they fall under the Agile umbrella. However, each offers unique tools that can be valuable in different contexts, even outside of software.

Perhaps instead of dismissing Agile outright for hardware projects, we could explore how its principles might be adapted to improve complex engineering endeavors. After all, if it helped us reach the moon and, decades later, send rovers to it, it might have more applications than we initially assume.

[–] Lichtblitz@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Also, Kanban was invented in the 40s as a process for automotive production lines. That's why it aligns so well with maintenance and operations projects in IT. It's ridiculous how more and more people claim it comes from software development and would not fit hardware projects, when that's the core use case of the methodology.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Good points all - I was just responding to a comic strip that I think meant to riff on the old, “what the customer wanted”, “how sales described it”, “what engineering proposed” etc. about project management but it just wasn’t finding the funny as it put the onus on Agile like isn’t this a silly discipline - well, no. :)

Ah, here it is:

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] weker01@feddit.de 116 points 5 months ago (6 children)

This is waterfall method propaganda! It never works out this smoothly. They probably forgot important requirements like: the astronauts need to be alive on Mars.

[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 52 points 5 months ago

Waterfall is missing the part where the customer realizes they didn't actually want to go to Mars they just wanted to view it out of a telescope.

But now they can only travel to Mars and the telescope is out of the budget because you spent so much money on the rocket

[–] Bezier@suppo.fi 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

2 years later: It's now up to the lawyers to figure out if it's the rocket that doesn't meet agreed requirements or if it's on the customer for not giving proper requirements.

[–] sheogorath@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

I hate how true this is. Not even 2 years later for my case.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Actual real world right now giant rockets include

  • One that is being built under waterfall methodology. It has been being built for several years. That's the Blue Origin New Glen heavy lift reusable rocket

  • One that is being developed under an agile methodology, it flew as a subscale lander to test their engine and flight control, it has flown four full test flights, improving on each. That's SpaceX's Starship

We are yet to see either launch a payload to orbit

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 10 points 5 months ago

Or the funders get bored of waiting after ten years of "no Mars yet" and cancel the project, leaving you with a half finished rocket.

[–] sheogorath@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

All the projects that have shittier outcomes in my experience is always waterfall. This is mainly because the stakeholders usually have this bright idea to be added in the middle of development that's really need to be added at all costs and then got angry when the timeline got pushed because of their fucking request breaking a lot of shit.

At least scrum has a lead time of around 2 weeks so that when someone has a idea we can tell them we'll add it to the backlog and hope they forgot about it during the next sprint planning.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This is what I came to the comment section for.

If like me you're not a pro, it seems to literally just mean linear phases, so yeah, any nonlinearity would cause problems.

[–] golden_calf@lemmy.world 56 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The art style is nice but the content makes no sense. Kanban and scrum are parts of agile. They are not their own systems.

Lean also doesn't mean you have no money. It's a system of manufacturing where you cross train people to do the jobs on either side of them so they can pick up slack if needed and keep things moving without hiring more people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CodexArcanum@lemmy.world 54 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Someone shared this on Mastodon so I'll just repost my thoughts from there. (Bonus for Lemmy, I was forced to squeeze all my thoughts into 500 characters, so this is the most succinct I've been on this site!)


Pretty incredible how little people seem to understand these. For one thing, every method other than waterfall is a subtype of agile methodology. The major distinction is that waterfall has a series of phases from design through building, testing, and delivery that attempts to plan the whole project up front. Agile methods focus on smaller iteration cycles with frequent, partial deliverables.

Something like kanban is designed for continuous delivery: we want to go to mars weekly.

LEAN development is a scam though, that one is accurate.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 45 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

The author is also hyping up waterfall too much. Agile was created because waterfall has its shortcomings (e.g. the team realizes too late that what they’re building isn’t what the customer wants).

But I also think it also represents how poorly implemented these ideas are. People say they do agile/kanban/scrum, but in reality they do some freak version of these.

[–] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So often it's waterfall planning and execution with agile names for roles and meetings.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 4 points 5 months ago

It’s barely waterfall planning either. Often there’s no planning, at least no coordinated one.

Currently at my current workplace we lack coordinated planning between teams. It seems like everybody is working in their own directions and it can take months until we get feedback from other teams. Mostly a product management problem.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

The amount of people who say they do agile/kanban/scrum but have never talked to a customer/end user, let alone released something, is frightening

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I agree, but agile and scrum are not meant to be followed to the letter no matter what. So people are doing it right if they notice some part of the process should be changed to make it work for them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ulterno@lemmy.kde.social 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

LEAN from the web:

After each iteration, project managers discuss bottlenecks, identify waste and develop a plan to eliminate it.

1st iteration:

Project Manager A: Requiring approval of multiple Project Managers for the same thing is causing a bottleneck. So is having to wait for a specific manager for a specific topic.

Resolution: Let all managers approve everything and need only a single manager's approval.

2nd iteration:

Project Manager B: There are too many redundant managers. It's a waste of resources.

Resolution: Get rid of all mangers but one. Actually, let the engineers manage themselves.

3rd iteration:

Consensus: LEAN development is a scam though

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 months ago

My impression of management science, at this point, is that it's not. The good ones just do it.

[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 41 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)
[–] match@pawb.social 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Going to the moon as a step towards going to Mars is so eminently correct that this comic should actually be Agile propaganda

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 5 months ago (9 children)

What is the methodology called where you:

Plan to go to orbit, blow up seconds into the flight, and declare it a success.

Plan to refuel in orbit, make it minutes before the rocket brakes. Fire the FTS, it fails, the rocket blows up a minute later und declare it a successful test of the FTS.

Argue to NASA that you are not the limiting factor to the moon mission planed for the end of the year, despite delivering none of the milestones.

FTS = flight termination system

[–] zarlin@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That's called R&D, Research and Development. As long as you learn from a failure, it is progress towards success.

[–] Hominine@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

An improvement.

[–] awesome_lowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 5 months ago

Getting to space. Fuck Musk, but SpaceX is doing great work.

[–] SatouKazuma@programming.dev 4 points 5 months ago

This is the Kerbal methodology.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] RonSijm@programming.dev 24 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Cowboy Programming:

PO: Hey we want to go to Mars
- 3 weeks of silence -
Developer: Hey I'm there, where are you?

[–] SatouKazuma@programming.dev 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

PO: Someone else figure out how to repeat what he did.

Second developer: Sorry, I tried to make sense of his rocket design but I can't figure out how to make a copy that doesn't explode before we even put the fuel in.

[–] pfm@scribe.disroot.org 22 points 5 months ago

If the person who drew that comic understood anything about complex systems or why agile works when used properly, it could make sense. But it doesn't.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 20 points 5 months ago

Firecracker looks proud. Really brightens my night.

[–] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The creator does not know Scrum, it's about transparency and not intransparency.

Also Kanban, Scrum and Lean Development are all agile development.

[–] LeroyJenkins@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

I like how many devs this pissed off. this picture is whack tho wtf

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago

I don't understand the Scrum one. Scrum is also agile with short development cycles, and prioritizes communication with the product owners and stakeholders.

I've never heard of lean development, but not a fan of "lean manufacturing," at least not the way it's commonly implemented in the U.S. (using primarily temp workers so they can ramp up and down their workforce as needed; and it also exacerbates supply-chain problems).

[–] humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Like yes, but undone armpits generate more wealth than the rocket to Mars

[–] shankrabbit@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Heh... Armpits. I know what you meant, but you still gave me a giggle with that one.

[–] humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago

Sorry, was writing it from the toilet. Needed to hurry in order to not miss a PBR

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 4 points 5 months ago

Yeah, I remember the time i had a project manager who’d come over from the construction industry, used construction industry metaphors, and thought everything would be the same.

load more comments
view more: next ›