I find the article to offer no insight. I surmise that it was written in a trollish manner to garner attention.
Looking at previous post by the Author, this is the first to extend over 5 lines.
Also, the Author tries to appeal to his authority[Oxford, Economics] which I consider poor taste; your logic should be able to stand on its own merits.
I myself was going to write an article on the failings of 37signals philosophy. But, talk is cheap; they have spent many years developing their philosophy; a simple cognitive dismantling of their philosophy would not suffice.
Any counter-arguments must be made in a similar fashion as they made their philosophy, in the real world with tangible results.
Yeah, what's more, it sounds like an undergrad economics degree. I don't care where you go to school, an undergrad degree in economics does not mean you understand this stuff as well as anyone. That's just pompous huffing.
Also, the Author tries to appeal to his authority[Oxford, Economics] which I consider poor taste; your logic should be able to stand on its own merits.
I myself was going to write an article on the failings of 37signals philosophy. But, talk is cheap; they have spent many years developing their philosophy; a simple cognitive dismantling of their philosophy would not suffice.
Any counter-arguments must be made in a similar fashion as they made their philosophy, in the real world with tangible results.