It has a long story and a lot of better explanations, but in short

  1. Some character has a problem;
  2. They find a short-term solution;
  3. It later becames unsufficient, and then a problem for them and others.
  • bryndos@fedia.io
    11·
    1 day ago

    ok, let me know when the bailiffs come round and start repossessing homes whose owners didn’t service their ‘technical debt’.

    You cannot “ignore debt” or prioritize one debt-service-obligation over another; it is an obligation to repay, you go bankrupt or get liquidated if you do not service all of it, that’s it.

    People like to use debt as a metaphor because of the serious and very real consequences of failing to make repayments. From a corpo perspective the difference between debt vs equity difference is so important essentially because of the legal standing of the creditors. That’s why you must service debt before profits, and even any elective opex.

    When people (incompetent IT morons) use that phrase at my work, it has nothing to dop with any of that. They use it as a phrase to ignore critical maintenandebtce. and the consequences are higher opex in future, not insolvency or total failure. The people who lose out have no standing and no legal recourse. It’s far closer to paying dividend to equity (or not in this case) - if the profits aren’t there there’s nothing the equity holders can really do to force a dividend.

    • myplacedk@lemmy.world
      2·
      16 hours ago

      You lost me at “bailiff”. You are overthinking the analogy.

      I see why you want to avoid the word at YOUR workplace. But the problem is your workplace, not the word.