Speaking of language, sometimes I remember how incredibly weird it is that a software feature designed to help you achieve something is canonically called a "wizard".

Oh I need help configuring this, lemme light the beacon and call for the aid of Digital Gandalf

Also implies that the default state of software is, I dunno, an orc or a barbarian or something. Something that you need a wizard to help you with, certainly.

Now thinking about creating a movement to promote "hobbit software". Pretty chill, keeps to itself, tends to its databases, hangs out with other hobbit software at the pub, broadly unbothered by the scheming of the wizards and the orcs, oblivious to the rise and fall of software empires around them.

Oh, the Electron empire is going to war with the Reacts? Sounds ghastly, sorry to hear that. Me and the lads are off to the pub to run some cronjobs, wanna come along?

@danderson this is named suckess. simple, effective, no monstrous combines, completing one task, but well. and everything is a pipe, old good UNIX way. on software level it's a good decomposition, separate libraries for different tasks. no hundreds of dependencies, no fat giant frameworks, no coprorate software that makes everyone dependent on it, no gigabytes of BS installation needed for work of a small utility. every utility is maximally independent, installs by copying the binary and perhaps a few libraries to a working directory and runs from console.
@iron_bug @danderson idk to me suckless sounds like it's trying to minmax something, sounds too try-hard for a hobbit.
@wolf480pl @danderson writing good software isn't easy. you either make an effort and get optimal fine tuned sofware or you don't work well enough and increase the piles of shitware that is more than enough already.
good software is a state of an art level.
@iron_bug @danderson yes, it just sounds like good software (by your standards) is not what OP had in mind