Contrast that to "pre-agile" style where managers would just poke in and out and ask about whatever random bit of functionality they happened to care about at the moment or re-prioritize stuff because someone send them an email
Um, no. pre-agile we had the Capability Maturity Model, Rational Unified Process (RUP), Adaptive Software Development (ASD), Extreme Programming (XP), and many others. And to do any of these "properly" required spending serious amounts of money on training, consulting, auditing, and oooo... don't forget "certification". Entire mini-industries are spawned to handle each of these, for each new "process". Each of them spawn "experts" or "gurus". Some are even able to make doctoral theses out of it.
Sound familiar? Agile is just another one of them. It is not a paradigm shift.
Whoever said in an earlier comment that this is about money is right: all of these software engineering paradigms are money grabs. Doesn't mean they don't work for very specific projects in specific circumstances, but the primary goal is for the Tailors to sell the Emperor some New Clothes.
The bottom line is that there isn't any single software engineering/development process that works well for all organizations, for all projects, just like isn't a Unified Field Theory.
The current round of internships is open internationally to women (cis and trans), trans men, and genderqueer people. Additionally, it's open to residents and nationals of the United States of any gender who are Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.
Isn't that discrimination? Why must I be of a certain race or sexuality to be considered for a job? Aren't there laws against this in the US?
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code. -- Dave Olson