If you’re still convinced you choose a language “by objective criteria,” check not the documentation but your pulse—it might be your amygdala talking, not the engineer. The author rips the mask off: a language is the single most expensive choice a company makes, yet we heroically hide our ego behind benchmarks and tidy checkmark tables.
Hired an expert to “evaluate Rust”? Congratulations: Rust is already chosen—now we’ll wrap it in a two-million-dollar “justification study” so our conscience won’t squeal. And the bill for this “invisible conversation” doesn’t show up on Twitter; it lands in the P&L: velocity drops, the budget burns, the runway shrinks, but the title of the “right CTO” gleams like a fresh conference badge.
Technical Debates Are Mythology for Adults
Technical debates? That’s mythology for adults. Onstage is identity; in the orchestra pit, emotion; and logic plays the role of a sign-language interpreter for a decision already made. We’re not comparing languages—we’re defending our biography.
So stop asking “which language is better.” Ask the grown-up question: “What does our self-identification with this compiler, runtime, and hiring culture cost?”
The Economics of Ego
The answer is unpleasant but useful: the invisible conversation almost always wins. So at least give it a credit limit—count the economics, not the fan-club arguments.
And if you suddenly want to “rewrite everything from scratch” again, remember: sometimes “the rewrite” isn’t architecture at all; it’s just an installment plan for the right to seem smarter than yesterday’s you.
This post is inspired by and references ideas from Steve Francia’s article: “The Hidden Conversation”