<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jshen</author><text>Imagine you are a large company and there are 10 ideas for things you can build next, and you can&amp;#x27;t do them all. You gather the people that build such things and ask them, &amp;quot;how much will it cost to make each of these, and how long will it take&amp;quot;. Do you think it is an acceptable answer if the builders reply, &amp;quot;I have no idea how much it will cost, I don&amp;#x27;t know how long it will take, and I don&amp;#x27;t know what you will have at the end of the process.&amp;quot; How should a business handle this problem?</text><parent_chain><item><author>msluyter</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s fun to watch observations like the following re-discovered again and again. From the NATO Software Engineering Conference in 1968:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Ross: The most deadly thing in software is the concept, which almost universally seems to be followed, that you are going to specify what you are going to do, and then do it. And that is where most of our troubles come from.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Fraser: One of the problems that is central to the software production process is to identify the nature of progress and 
to find some way of measuring it. Only one thing seems to be clear just now. It is that program construction is 
not always a simple progression in which each act of assembly represents a distinct forward step and that the 
final product can be described simply as the sum of many sub-assemblies.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Full transcript of the 1968 conference here. &lt;a href=&quot;http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/brian.randell/NATO/nato1968.PDF&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk&amp;#x2F;brian.randell&amp;#x2F;NATO&amp;#x2F;nato1968.PD...&lt;/a&gt; It&amp;#x27;s a really fun read!)</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why don’t software development methodologies work?</title><url>http://typicalprogrammer.com/why-dont-software-development-methodologies-work/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>DenisM</author><text>Having read &amp;quot;the mythical man-month&amp;quot; I came to conclusion that majority of the problems we have today were discovered an described by the 1970-ies.</text><parent_chain><item><author>msluyter</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s fun to watch observations like the following re-discovered again and again. From the NATO Software Engineering Conference in 1968:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Ross: The most deadly thing in software is the concept, which almost universally seems to be followed, that you are going to specify what you are going to do, and then do it. And that is where most of our troubles come from.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Fraser: One of the problems that is central to the software production process is to identify the nature of progress and 
to find some way of measuring it. Only one thing seems to be clear just now. It is that program construction is 
not always a simple progression in which each act of assembly represents a distinct forward step and that the 
final product can be described simply as the sum of many sub-assemblies.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Full transcript of the 1968 conference here. &lt;a href=&quot;http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/brian.randell/NATO/nato1968.PDF&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk&amp;#x2F;brian.randell&amp;#x2F;NATO&amp;#x2F;nato1968.PD...&lt;/a&gt; It&amp;#x27;s a really fun read!)</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why don’t software development methodologies work?</title><url>http://typicalprogrammer.com/why-dont-software-development-methodologies-work/</url></story>