https://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebt.html
https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebtQuadrant.html
https://sites.google.com/site/unclebobconsultingllc/a-mess-is-not-a-technical-debt
A mess is not a technical debt. A mess is just a mess. Technical debt decisions are made based on real project constraints. They are risky, but they can be beneficial. The decision to make a mess is never rational, is always based on laziness and unprofessionalism, and has no chance of paying of in the future. A mess is always a loss. (Uncle Bob)
contraponen:
https://hackernoon.com/there-are-3-main-types-of-technical-debt-heres-how-to-manage-them-4a3328a4c50c
En los 2 primeros ejemplos de Dag, la deuda tecnica siempre se basa en un diseño profesional y correcto, no la flojera o al no-profesionalismo que Uncle Bob describe.
I agree with Uncle Bob that this is usually a reckless debt, because people underestimate where the DesignPayoffLine is.
https://martinfowler.com/bliki/DesignStaminaHypothesis.html
hay 2 curvas por agregar deuda tecnica y time to market.
al final el buen diseño es para obtener mas rapidez en el desarrollo (y mejor calidad).