That'd be so great. No more cursing if I forgot the "-ai" or "-ki" flag in my search and see this odious AI overview processing window rendering slowly and taking up the space where my search results should be.
I always had this: "Only dead software needs no maintenance" in the back of my head, and similarly "bug free only means it's not been used and vetted enough"
While probing into this, I think there could be a case where software is mostly done: when it is shipped with the hardware and run in an isolated environment.
The mentioned tools are probably not distributed in binary form for different OS, I assume, otherwise that statement _cannot_ be true.
> failing to to finish software indicates a badly defined scope.
In my first job there'd even been a contractual penalty if you are not done in time. And this company produced examples of "finished" software, that controlled warehouse material flow, sometimes running on 20 yrs old MCU. (which of course meant they could not extract money of these customers, because the software ran too good)
Slightly moving into the other direction, after 17 years of science and tech optimism I see myself turning into a Luddite more and more.
First observation was that communication and social aspects of software seems crucial for success and proliferation.
And next came: that technology seems inept to solve any socio-econimic problems, but rather aggravates them.
Second that. I see that as a failure of society or democracy as a whole - that we are no longer able to have that broad, public conversation and act accordingly. Why should every "innovation" be shoved down our throats, if we don't want to?
Generally, it's inter-subjectively decided what art is, which works enter the canon and are passed on. Placing it solely in each individual, "it's only a matter of taste", falls a bit short of some centuries of aesthetic theory.