Both this article and the one it references only seem to provide more evidence that the descent into mediocrity of the software industry is certainly happening. That said, there's a difference between actual quality, and "quality" as popularised by metrics-driven dogma.
Example for the last point: people seem to have forgotten how much of a "quality" shitshow was Twitter. The thing was written in Ruby on Rails, downtime was normal and expected by everyone. Yet the platform thrived and the username grew. Or Facebook, the page didn't fully load like 30% of the time, meaning that at least one panel was broken, some picture was missing, etc.
Is it? Or is a massive industry forming around a still small group of hackers?
Maybe the two are groups are not the same. Someone getting into software to make money is different to the kid who couldn't put the computer down. There are people that want to hack on software and others that want to solve business problems with computers for profit.
Maybe, just maybe, the best people to build complex software systems that serve millions of people aren't the ones who can do the most leetcode problems.
