In the previous post, we summed up the misconceptions we discussed in this series and what they mean for the current discussion if AI solutions will replace software developers.

In the previous post we have discussed that software is invisible which deprives humans from an essential reasoning instrument. We have also looked at the malleability curse, the property of software that it can be bent and twisted in totally absurd and nonsensical ways while still working in some way.

In the previous post, we discussed the value preservation dilemma of software. We have seen that software – opposed to almost all physical goods – needs to be changed and adapted to the ever-changing needs and demands of its environment to preserve its value.

In the previous post of this blog series we discussed the greenfield fallacy and its consequences. In this post we will discuss the next misconception, the value preservation dilemma and its consequences. Let us get started.

In the previous post of this blog series we discussed the broken abstraction dilemma, that abstractions help to create concise descriptions but take away degrees of freedom, and that breaking an abstraction usually means increasing the required size of the description by orders of magnitude.