{"id":29844,"date":"2019-10-31T21:32:17","date_gmt":"2019-10-31T18:32:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/blog\/seks-lyubov-i-otnosheniya-skvoz-prizmu-mikroservisnoj-arhitektury\/"},"modified":"2019-10-31T21:32:17","modified_gmt":"2019-10-31T18:32:17","slug":"seks-lyubov-i-otnosheniya-skvoz-prizmu-mikroservisnoj-arhitektury","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/blog\/seks-lyubov-i-otnosheniya-skvoz-prizmu-mikroservisnoj-arhitektury","title":{"rendered":"Sex, Love, and Relationships through the Lens of Microservices Architecture","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

\"When I separated sex, love, and relationships, everything became significantly simpler\u2026\" a quote from a girl wise from life experience.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We are programmers dealing with machines, but we are not devoid of human emotions. We fall in love, get married, have children, and... die. Just like ordinary mortals, we face emotional problems when 'personalities clash', 'we're not suited for each other', and so on. Love triangles, relationship breakups, betrayals, and other emotionally charged events occur in our lives as well. <\/p>\n

On the other hand, due to the nature of our profession, we prefer everything to be logical and that one thing leads to another. If you don't like me\u2014then what exactly? If our personalities don\u2019t mesh, which specific aspect is the issue? Explanations like 'you don\u2019t show me compassion or love' seem to us like a set of vaguely defined abstractions that need to be measured (in what units do you measure compassion?) and clarified with specific triggering conditions (which events should trigger this compassion?).
\n<\/a><\/noindex>
\nModern psychology has accumulated a vast array of abstractions and terminologies to describe the emotional aspect of human relationships. When you go to a psychologist and say that you're having trouble with your partner, you'll receive a multitude of advice along the lines of 'be more tolerant of each other', 'you need to first understand yourself and figure out what truly matters to you'. You'll sit for hours listening to the psychologist state fairly obvious things. Or you'll read popular psychology literature, which boils down to the simple formulation of 'do what you like and don\u2019t do what you don\u2019t like'. Everything else is just a pleasant garnish to this little seed of banal truth. <\/p>\n

But hold on, programming is an unpredictable process. In programming, figuratively speaking, we attempt to simplify the surrounding world into manageable abstractions. We strive to reduce the entropy of the world around us by fitting it into the logic of algorithms we understand. We have accumulated immense experience in such transformations. We have devised numerous principles, manifestos, and algorithms. <\/p>\n

This raises the question - can we apply all these developments to human relationships? Let's take a look... at microservices architecture. <\/p>\n

From this perspective, marriage is like a huge monolithic application, which becomes increasingly difficult to support over time. A pile of non-functional features has accumulated (where is the freshness of the relationship?), technical debt (when was the last time you gave your spouse flowers?), and disruptions in the interaction protocols between parts of the system (I mention a new car, and you tell me again to take out the trash), while the system consumes resources (both financial and emotional).<\/p>\n

Let's apply the microservices architectural approach and, for starters, break the system into components. Of course, the breakdown can be anything, but here everyone is their own software architect. <\/p>\n

Marriage functionally consists of <\/p>\n