this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2026
14 points (88.9% liked)
Programming
27913 readers
351 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I get the point being made, and it makes sense, however the ending begins to sound a lot like the "640k is enough" (that wasn't actually said) but was used by a lot of people for their incredulity of how much more progress could there be, or be necessary. It also reminds me of an old Popular Science article of the 50s that tried to imagine how life would be in 2000. They got a lot of the technical things close, which is sort of what this post is trying to suggest, that we can imagine what's technically possible for science. But they got a lot of the social aspects of how things could be used wrong or totally didn't see it, as the necessity of use changes.
If they're just keeping the suggestion of categories of software very broad, then I suppose new needs could be pushed under existing headings, but I think they're reaching to say more that everything we might need in the future already has a category with something there, and anything else isn't a need.