But costs aren’t just about the bottomline, they’re also a measure of efficiency. I have a distinct distaste for waste. Money spent on the frivolous or the ill-considered is money that can’t be spent elsewhere. Like an engine drinking too much oil just to run. Tight tolerances (but not too tight!) are a joy in themselves.
Source: Caring about costs is cool
I’ve been a fanboy of DHH for many, many years. Yes, he created Ruby on Rails, which I’m still enamored with, 14 years later, so we have that in common, and as someone who’s made a living using it for the past 10 years, that’s a big deal. However, he’s one of only a couple of people “on the internet” with which I agree with on almost everything, and I’ve never really understood why until this post.
Of course I’ve known that he was an F1 driver, but you can probably drive those cars without understanding the engineering concept of correct tolerances in an engine. That he intuits this premise deeply enough to draw this analogy is the key I was missing to understand my fascination with him.
I may be a programmer (and system administrator, and network engineer, and database architect), but I’m a mechanical engineer at heart. It’s how my mind works. I see how things are related and interconnected. I tell everyone I work with the same thing: I’m awesome at seeing the trees, but pretty bad at seeing the forrest. I’ll give you options; you make the decisions.
Being a physical engineer, whether mechanical or civil or electrical or aeronautical or nuclear, isn’t just a vocation; it’s a way of thinking about the world and how it works. In this way, I think our thinking lines up really well, and I think that leads to thinking basically the same way about most everything else.
It’s a theory, anyway.