Change is a measure of competence


I’ve been taking a Twitter sabbatical, but I made the mistake of absentmindedly launching TweetBot on my phone this afternoon. How’s that for some well-established neural pathways?

As always, @Techconnectify had an interesting perspective on something I’ve been mulling for a while:

In my opinion, we should see a change in opinion or tact as a good thing. It means someone is responding to a changing situation.

I think it’s the best way to measure competence.

Yet a large percentage of people equate competence with steadfastness

I empathise with people who want to keep things the way they are. It worked in the past, or we wouldn’t be here. It was proven, demonstrated, argued, and refined. But the tense is key; it’s not rational to expect something to continue working if its operating environment changes.

His tweets were referring to a large-scale health situation we’re dealing with right now, but could easily apply to so many other things. Treating environmental damage as an economic externality. Citing cable TV as a reason against mandatory net neutrality. Using a children’s toothbrush.

Change for change’s sake is bad, as is jumping headfirst into untested ideas. But when something is demonstrably no longer working, change is the only honest and acceptable action.

Author bio and support


Ruben Schade is a technical writer and IaaS engineer in Sydney, Australia who refers to himself in the third person in bios. Wait, not BIOS… my brain should be EFI by now.

The site is powered by Hugo, FreeBSD, and OpenZFS on OrionVM, everyone’s favourite cloud infrastructure provider.

If you found this post helpful or entertaining, you can shout me a coffee or buy some silly merch. Thanks!