> Actually your comment is a great demonstration of poor engineering leadership. You've already decided on an outcome and are shifting the narrative to adhere to this outcome.
For me it's actually the decision of a CTO of one of top 10 companies in the world in terms of software size/value/etc. to push it down to very smart people - that's bad leadership.
Why? Because I guess this thing didn't go as planned - a self fulfilling prophecy that shows how awesome serverless is. It backfired in a period where people are questioning whether all these megahypes are not actually just some marketing. Yes, he is responsible for that, for pushing it down to his people that "everything new must be started with serverless" first. When actually in some situations, as the article showed, a monolith or a (big) microservice would do the job better.
Why the hell hire super smart people when you have to tell them how to do things?
For me it's actually the decision of a CTO of one of top 10 companies in the world in terms of software size/value/etc. to push it down to very smart people - that's bad leadership.
Why? Because I guess this thing didn't go as planned - a self fulfilling prophecy that shows how awesome serverless is. It backfired in a period where people are questioning whether all these megahypes are not actually just some marketing. Yes, he is responsible for that, for pushing it down to his people that "everything new must be started with serverless" first. When actually in some situations, as the article showed, a monolith or a (big) microservice would do the job better.
Why the hell hire super smart people when you have to tell them how to do things?