> On re-reading Sandi’s original article it says kind of what I remember it saying, but it also… kinda doesn’t? There’s a lot more talk about programmers honoring the abstractions of elders who came before them<p>That's because the original article is so clearly about tearing down bad abstractions, but a large majority of programmers - based upon discussion about the article - seem to never get past the first part of it.<p>Given a long enough time horizon, all abstractions turn bad. The solution isn't to not abstract. The solution is to tear them down when they go bad. And if you don't learn to tear down bad abstractions, your codebase will devolve into shit regardless of what you do.