> I don't know if I can communicate my point, but reading that $PERSON who works at $COMPANY says that $PRODUCT is shit because he had problems scaling to 100mln users is a totally useless point for all the people outside the few tech bubbles around the world.

Can relate to this a lot and I agree. US / Silicon Valley tech blog articles aren't always informative and one has to apply a lot of critical thinking if they want to extract any value from them. I am with you here.

> It's not about "everything is good", I never said that everything is good, but in the real world™ people built great things using almost any tech, maybe even "uncool" tech: it worked, they made money, they were successful, their company served customers for years and years

I would immediately agree with you if the result-oriented people actually made good money [almost] always regardless of technology. But it isn't universally the case, so very often you have programmers who know modern (and very good) tools but are required to use ancient ones because "they just work".

Truth is that no, very often they don't just work; they "just work" due to the suffering of countless underpaid programmers who can't say "no" because they are afraid for their family's livelihoods. Let's not conflate concepts. ;)

I've seen people replace legacy PHP + MySQL + ssh/rsync scripts for deployment with a managed service like Heroku (or Docker/k8s, or bare metal on two instances) and a more modern programming language -- hosting bills dropped by anywhere from 50% to 800% and like 3/4 of the IT personnel became superfluous (and were fired in a few months). There is a lot of efficiency that's routinely left on the table and is never reached for.

It's a nuanced discussion. Generalizations like yours and like mine can't nail it. I am 100% with you that not everything has to be "new" and "cool": absolutely! But this same argument is also used to drag down or even stop measurable progress, productivity gains and expense savings.

There's a balance to be struck and both programmers and businessmen have too extreme points of view -- on the both sides of the spectrum -- and don't achieve it.

> "Never", "Always", "This is broken", "You'll get burned", "It doesn't work"... that's the part that is not constructive: it didn't work for you, for your case, maybe you did some mistakes, but $PERSON must stick to his/her own reality, not try to extend their experience to everyone else.

Agreed in principle, but not in your particular example. MongoDB is supposed to actually store data. For several years in a row it was failing even in that. You can't claim you are a database and lose people's data. So I definitely would side with that author's viewpoint that "MongoDB sucks" because yes, it does, or at least it did for years in the past and nowadays I am too burned by it to try it out again.

> I don't know where you're from, I'm from Italy so let me put down some points:

RE: the tech landscape of the local market, I am from (and in) Bulgaria and it's almost the same here. I was getting Ruby on Rails offers in 2020 and it was touted as a "bleeding edge modern technology". Those recruiters gave me good chuckles.

In the meantime I am working with Elixir for 4.5 years and Rust for 2.5 years now...