It is typical for devs.
Meanwhile ops have to support every half-arsed tyre-fire technology until the end of time, because a dev wanted to try it once, and now it’s in prod with users relying on it.
Kubernetes is in a sense the pushback against that “do what you want, as long as k8s is up, what you run in your pods is your problem, not ours”.
Webdev does seem to pay better than most other stuff, though.
Still happily using JEE/Spring/ASP.NET + VanillaJS in what concerns webdev projects.
And while other AOT compiled languages might offer a little bit more performance, they lack in tooling and libraries.
Until somebody cyberattacks those pods and steals all personal data of your users because the devs didn't bother to apply security patches. But hey, it's not your problem. You are not responsible for the pods. k8s is still up.
But that has always been true. If a dev leaves a SQL injection for example in the code and it got penetrated, absolutely no one would blame the sysadmin for that.
My interpretation of DevOps is that it's one team with shared responsibility and not "shove your stuff in that pod and don't bother me."
E.g. you could imagine some extreme case in which dependency X, version N has a critical vulnerability - but at the same time, the developed software relies on exactly version N being present and will break horribly on any other version.
You'd need Dev and Ops to actively work together to solve this problem and no amount of layering or containerization would get you around that.
Very infuriating mindset to deal with.
Imagine if people could all just get along.
I've been on both sides of this divide myself, but have spent the last fifteen years or so as a developer. In my experience, developers will burn the whole place down if we're given the chance.
We're focused on writing code, and it's boring to write the same code over and over: we want to write new code, in exciting ways, and we are surprised when it fails in exciting ways.
We're focused on delivering features; our incentives are all about getting it done, not about getting it done well (our industry doesn't even have a consistent view of what's good or bad: note that C/C++ are still used in 2019) or supportably. Some organisations really try had to properly incentivise developers, but I've not seen it really work yet. DevOps is an attempt to incentivise developers by getting us to buy into ops. I've read a lot of success stories, but not seen a lot of success with my own eyes.
I do my best to be diligent, I do my best to wear my Ops hat — yet I still fall down. I don't think that it's unavoidable, but so far I've not avoided it, and I've not seen others avoid it either.
The real problem always starts when they become separate cost centers with separate budgets and have to independently show a 'profit'.
This worked great when several other business systems relied on their vanity toy, and invariably the API would change with every release.
There's a balance to be struck between 'never change anything because it's always worked' and 'new shiny every week'. In my experience it's an absolute nightmare getting people to agree where the line is, and on top of that, get management to buy-in and push-back when either side oversteps.