aa_memon

There’s a common notion that decisions by committee should be avoided. Now I doubt that committees identify themselves as committees. I assume that if it was easy to spot committees they would be avoided. So, I would assume that committees are invisible unless you go looking. My question for HN is what are signs that you’ve got a committee on your hands whether you realize it or not?

I see posts on HN with very talented people who can deep dive into very low level hardware/software so I'm wondering would it be possible to prevent thousands 2011-2014 27" iMacs from ending up in landfills by making target display mode work with newer USB-C MacBooks [Thunderbolt 3 to thunderbolt 2 adapter](https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/MMEL2AM/A/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-to-thunderbolt-2-adapter)?

FYI these are iMacs that have Thunderbolt ports instead of Displayports. There's already a way to do this with < 2011 iMacs with Displayports.

Things I've already tried, but the experience is not great: - used NoMachine and dummy HDMI - Installed Monterey on the 2012 iMac and use it as an airplay receiver - used tools like [Deskreen](https://github.com/pavlobu/deskreen)

Obviously, it is a subjective opinion that modern web development and associated devops are unnecessarily complicated.

The reasons are discussed often right on HN.

- The desire to mimic the technical infrastructures of big companies like Google and Facebook whether one’s system needs that level of scale or not.

- The desire to replicate software architecture’s of the bigger companies things like micro services.

- I also think engineers want to work on interesting things and complex things probably tickle certain parts of engineers’ brains.

what would one have to change to incentivize engineers to build simpler (perhaps even boring) systems/technologies/architectures?