Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

dreamsongs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 351 posts

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#161

Post by adastra22 »

KerrAvon wrote: post #136
dkarl wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Expedient" is a common (or at least not rare) English word that means something like "practical and effective even if not directly attending to higher or deeper considerations." For example, if two students in a class are having frequent confrontations that bring learning in the class to a halt, and attempts by teachers and counselors to address their conflict directly haven't been effective, the expedient solution…

I think this is misleading -- geoengineering + social change will be necessary. You're not going to Scotty your way out of climate change.

Why not? Really, why not? If we had a profitable way to extract CO2 from the atmosphere at scale, to deacidify the oceans, clean up toxic waste, etc., what would be left? How would that not solve the problem?

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#162

Post by katbyte »

lisper wrote: post #104
hammock wrote: post #43

There was an article posted on here[1] a while back that I only just found again, introducing the term "expedience." The idea was that we think we live in a world where people have to have "the best" sweater, be on "the best" social network, drive "the best" car, etc. But when you look at what really WINS, it's not the best, it's the most "expedient" - i.e. sufficiently good, with built-in social proof, inoculated of…

> Is Amazon "the best" place to go shopping? No, you might find better prices on individual items if you put a little more work into it, but it's the most expedient. It's not just that. Every time you do business with a new web site you assume additional risk. Amazon is a known quantity. You can be pretty sure that they are not going to outright scam you, and they aren't going to be hacked by script kiddies. There is…

Yep it’s the return policy that allowed me to gamble on items that may or may not be real/functional vs spending a ton of time to find one elsewhere that maybe is, but if it’s not it’ll be hard to return

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#163

Post by agumonkey »

I assume that 'worse' often means find adequation with average and mass. This ensures a longer existence, later you may absorb the "better" you didn't have early on. Look how dynamic languages started to have better data types, various traits (generators, closures..), jit .. all things they could pluck out of old "glorious" languages that were .. somehow too advanced for the mainstream. It's a strange schizophrenic situation.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#164

Post by adastra22 »

hammock wrote: post #64
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is a Tesla (perhaps outdated example since X) "the best" car - no, but it is the most expedient. The most expedient car? Or BEV in the US?

Fair point... it was a coastal California-centric point but there is plenty of nuance or adjustment to be made. At some point in the 90's we'd probably have said "Silver E class Mercedes" is the most expedient luxury sedan, if you wanted a different example.

I think Toyota would have gotten your point across better. Tesla is most certainly not expedient. It is a luxury purchase.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#165

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

hammock wrote: post #43

There was an article posted on here[1] a while back that I only just found again, introducing the term "expedience." The idea was that we think we live in a world where people have to have "the best" sweater, be on "the best" social network, drive "the best" car, etc. But when you look at what really WINS, it's not the best, it's the most "expedient" - i.e. sufficiently good, with built-in social proof, inoculated of…

>Is Amazon "the best" place to go shopping?

The number one reason I use Amazon, is not for the best prices, but because of their return policy. Amazon returns are actually often more painless than physical store returns.

Being able to return something predictably and easily outweighs a small difference in price.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#166

Post by downWidOutaFite »

circlefavshape wrote: post #102
dkarl wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Expedient" is a common (or at least not rare) English word that means something like "practical and effective even if not directly attending to higher or deeper considerations." For example, if two students in a class are having frequent confrontations that bring learning in the class to a halt, and attempts by teachers and counselors to address their conflict directly haven't been effective, the expedient solution…

> For example, if we solve climate change with geoengineering instead of by addressing thoughtless consumerism, corporate impunity, and lack of international accountability, many people would feel frustrated or let down by the solution because it would solve the problem without addressing the moral shortcomings that led to the problem. Oof. Now I understand something I didn't before

No you don't because there is no expedient solution.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#167

Post by adastra22 »

GiorgioG wrote: post #30
api wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JavaScript really illustrates the ultimate path-dependence of evolution. It got widely deployed during a boom time and therefore we are stuck with it forever.

We don’t have to be stuck with it forever. Start pushing WASM instead of React, etc. We can get there, but as technologists we have to make a concerted effort to do so.

We will still be stuck with it forever for compatibility reasons

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#168

Post by downWidOutaFite »

adastra22 wrote: post #161
KerrAvon wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is misleading -- geoengineering + social change will be necessary. You're not going to Scotty your way out of climate change.

Why not? Really, why not? If we had a profitable way to extract CO2 from the atmosphere at scale, to deacidify the oceans, clean up toxic waste, etc., what would be left? How would that not solve the problem?

why are you fantasizing? none of that is going exist (caveat: unless we figure out infinite clean energy).

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#169

Post by supportengineer »

karel-3d wrote: post #29

I remember when I had a lesson about OSI layers, where the teacher has carefully described all the layers in detail and then said something like "most of this is not important, these layers don't really exist, TCP/IP got popular first because it's just much simpler than OSI was"

I've never done any kernel programming but I assumed the OSI model corresponded to Linux kernel modules or a similar division internally.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#170

Post by jen20 »

stonemetal12 wrote: post #83
pjc50 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the heck is a central vaccum? One plumbed into the house? Isn't that spectacularly expensive?

>A main disadvantage of central vacuums is the higher initial cost. In the United States, the average central vacuum system has an installed cost of around $1,000. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_vacuum_cleaner Considering the price of a house it isn't "spectacularly expensive". On the other hand vs the price of a hoover yeah a bit. Since it sits in a closet or garage and doesn't move, weight becomes a non issu…

I have one (in a ~2yo house). It's a nice idea, but practically the hoses are a pain in the ass, and I still use my Dyson almost exclusively.
Post reply on HN