@r000t @Godsend @ins0mniak

> I'd say it's more like a car designer who makes cars in CAD having difficulty replacing a timing chain or not knowing what OBD-2 even is.

Everything is logistics: you cannot design a system very well if you try to design it in isolation and you don't understand the deployment.

> They may *also* manage the physical copper or fiber runs creating that network.

Well, that's netops, right, and I think these are all related and everyone that knows Scheme but doesn't know assembly is a dingus, same goes for copper, same goes for RF, same goes for fiber, same goes for having a mental map of the backbone and an idea how BGP works and how your disk spins and then you watch someone click and you can see the request work its way up and down the backbone to the last mile to the Cisco gear to the F5 to the cable to the API server to the memory allocations the OS is doing and the iops Postgres is waiting for. It's not like I've got no gaps in my knowledge but, you know, a mother fucker gits dead before he's done gitting gud.

> Sysadmins can also write programs, yes, but you'll find they're often very narrow-scoped, very small scripts, sometimes meant to only be used literally one time and then thrown away.

Yes; I am old and I know this, thus the example being logfile analysis. The point is that the sysadmin can automate the machine by speaking the machine's language to it or he should quit his job.

> Docker exists because programmers aren't sysadmins

Docker exists because Codecamp dipshits don't know how their box works.