About myself and everyone else.
It’s a good try but it’s a bit off in some regards
In the library analogy it’s never mentioned that if one person reads \ write the book you have to keep it on the shelve just because of legislation.We also only have this problem of books due to the architect picking a library building too small for the expected growth due to the populated.It’s like expecting a library bus which serves upper hutt will be as effective in new york, nothing to do with books but purely business and demographics and uptake.
The library analogy also doesn’t cover removal of old books or journal overhead for managing the books itself, i.e. archiving. The same way it’s left out here is the same reason why it’s left out of design of a product. People don’t think past their delivery date.Also, in this entire analogy there wouldn’t be a single problem if it only took 1 microsecond for a person to read a book. i.e. slow queries due to those people in the library that has no idea what they really want and they end up standing in front of people who do know what they want. They also end up taking 5 books and only read 1, like waiting at the starbucks queue.
Again, technical flaw here but the people don’t actually have to queue for books. Technically a book never leaves the shelve, a copy of it is created in a buffer with an index so all people know that if they are looking for the adventures of tom sawyer they need to goto gate 4, pick up their copy (which is infinite until we ran out of buffer) and bugger off.
But it’s a fun article to read none the less.