Are you seriously trying to put the blame for software bloat and bad UX on "noobs" implementing things poorly?
Popular web pages being choked with ads and modal banners is the result of business decisions to put those there. Jira being notoriously laggy and confusing is the result of prioritizing feature breadth over UX. Apps being built in heavy frameworks is the result of founders and CTOs deciding that they can ship faster and be more likely to make it to the next funding round if they color within the lines than if they focus on speed. Major company products often being poorly designed is the result of organizational fragmentation and lack of a global perspective.
Does everybody always do the best job they could within the constraints they have? Obviously not. Are the problems with technology in general primarily the result of _bad engineers making implementation mistakes_? Absolutely not!
In the last 20 years, if there is one thing that really changed in this profession was the amount of leeway developers have to criticize product and UX decisions. We're approaching "none".
The amount of political capital you have to spend just to avoid bloat is not available to most senior developers, let alone to "noobs".
It seems like you're making a point of outrage of something that's evident. If you hire way more than the market was used to, you'll hire less qualified people, and unless tooling is better to replace the reduced skills and experience, lower quality software will be produced. I agree OP was doing a lot of drama about "noobs ruining everything" which is also a stretch, but this negative effect should be self evident.
It's not actually self-evident: even if you take for granted that less-qualified people get hired, that could mean that companies invest more in training, or that the marginal bit of software is equally good but slower to produce than if more-qualified engineers had written it (because it took more code reviews and produced more technical debt along the way), etc.
Besides, that's barely pertinent to my point, which is that if you see bugs, you can probably blame them on engineers, but if you see design and product choices you don't like, attributing it to "noob" programming is bizarre.
>Are you seriously trying to put the blame for software bloat and bad UX on "noobs" implementing things poorly?
>Popular web pages being choked with ads and modal banners is the result of business decisions to put those there
Who do you think has implemented all that shitty ad and banner code? It for sure wasn't a professional. If ads had initially been implemented by competent programmers they wouldn't have contained nearly as many avenues for abuse and actual malware spreading mechanisms.
More so professional programmers can pick their work. Noobs have to settle for writing shitty ad code.
>bad engineers making implementation mistakes
Most of these noobs aren't even "engineers" they are bunch of near tech illiterate "normies" who have just graduated from two week code camp. These are the people who unironically say "my job is just copy-pasting from StackOverflow". I am sorry to say this, but you (whoever is reading this and hard disagreeing) might be the problem.
Popular web pages being choked with ads and modal banners is the result of business decisions to put those there. Jira being notoriously laggy and confusing is the result of prioritizing feature breadth over UX. Apps being built in heavy frameworks is the result of founders and CTOs deciding that they can ship faster and be more likely to make it to the next funding round if they color within the lines than if they focus on speed. Major company products often being poorly designed is the result of organizational fragmentation and lack of a global perspective.
Does everybody always do the best job they could within the constraints they have? Obviously not. Are the problems with technology in general primarily the result of _bad engineers making implementation mistakes_? Absolutely not!