Everyone inherently knows this, that's why they reach out to others when stuck on a bug (see also rubber-ducking). But why is it so hard to convince individuals and organizations of the benefits of pair programming?
That was a scene in The Office. The salesmen phone the cheaper competitor's customer service while on a sales call to let them see how long they would wait on hold if they needed support.
That said, I had an experience recently where the chatbot replaced the phone tree that led to a human and it was very helpful.
> Why would you spend your time and effort building a house that earns you $50k when for the same time and effort you could build a house that earns you $150k?
Luxury housing is exempt from rent-control laws in places where those exist.
> Yeah, because he was guarding them against the current administration abusing the Justice Department to go after them. Same reason he pardoned Fauci and others.
Are pre-emptive pardons a common thing for American presidents to do?
DRY is about ensuring that the same code doesn't have to change in two places because the engineer changing it in one place might not know that. But so many applications of DRY mindlessly violate the single responsibility principle and create coupling where there shouldn't be.
> Who else has had to deal with idiots who froth at the mouth when you exceed an 80 line character margin?
Not once in my 11 year career. But almost every codebase I've worked on has had debilitating maintainability issues because the only principle other engineers seemed to follow was DRY, at the sacrifice of every principle in SOLID.