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

311–320 of 351 posts

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#311

Post by bccdee »

tightbookkeeper wrote: post #289
bccdee wrote: post #187

> Both early Unix and C compilers had simple structures, are easy to port, require few machine resources to run, and provide about 50%-80% of what you want from an operating system and programming language. > Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses. The key argument behind worse-is-better is that an OS which is easy to implement will dominate the market in an ecosystem with many competing hardware standards. Ope…

Rust is not very popular in terms of number of users. It’s just over represented in online discussion.

It made it into the Linux kernel, and it's still a relatively young language. I don't think any language has made such a large impact since Java or Javascript, both of which are nearly 30 years old now.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#312

Post by tightbookkeeper »

mplewis wrote: post #309
tightbookkeeper wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust is not very popular in terms of number of users. It’s just over represented in online discussion.

Rust isn’t popular in web dev. It’s very popular in embedded.

Is it? It seems popular with people getting into low level for the first time.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#313

Post by foldr »

inglor_cz wrote: post #308
foldr wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone agrees that innocent people are being killed in the Israel-Palestine conflict and that this is an outrage. The disagreement is over exactly which people fall into this category and who is to blame. Acknowledging the horror and being outraged by it does not preclude thought, and it is ungenerous and inaccurate (and, indeed, cynical!) to characterize all protests about the conflict as thoughtless. Your take on…

Wars are brutal. No doubt about that. Nevertheless the disagreement that you mention ("which people fall into this category and who is to blame") seems to run so deep even here in the West, that I wonder if some of those protests wouldn't end up in an old-fashioned pogrom, if they weren't thoroughly policed from the outside. Existence of more-or-less successful slave revolts across history doesn't really say much abo…

>Existence of more-or-less successful slave revolts across history doesn't really say much about viability of slavery as an economic institution

That's the point. The Haitian revolution didn't have anything much to do with the economic viability of slavery, but it still happened, and was a major and very definitely causative event in the broader history of the abolition of slavery.

If you think that slavery ended for purely economic reasons, then perhaps you can point to a mainstream historian who advocates this theory. I don't think you are doing your overall argument any favors by tying it to wild revisionist lost causes.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#314

Post by sesm »

JohnFen wrote: post #76

"Worse is better" has become like "move fast and break things". They're both sayings that reveal an often-overlooked truth, but they have both been taken far too far and result in worse things for everybody.

And then it transformed into "move things and break fast".

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#315

Post by shuntress »

jpc0 wrote: post #288
Arch-TK wrote: post #272

I have a theory that the worse is better approach begets an environment where the worse is better approach is better. At least hypothetically, I think there's an approach which is not "the right thing" or "worse is better" but rather more like "the right foundations". Most interface complexity in my experience seems to be inherited from underlying interface complexity, and it takes a lot of work to fix that underlyin…

I have a question for this premise. How would you design a network interface using your right foundations model? I'm not talking about HTML or whatnot. I have some sort of medium, copper, fiber whatever and I would like to send 10 bytes to the other side of it. What is the right foundations that would lead to an implementation which isn't overly complex.

> I have some sort of medium, copper, fiber whatever and I would like to send 10 bytes to the other side of it. What is the right foundations that would lead to an implementation which isn't overly complex.

The bane of every project is understanding what you actually need to do

For example, it is entirely possible that the "right foundation" for your proposed scenario is: Hook one end up to a lightswitch, the other to a light bulb, hire two operators trained in morse code. Then once the 10 bytes are sent write them their cheques and shut it down.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#316

Post by shuntress »

me_again wrote: post #294
jpc0 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question for this premise. How would you design a network interface using your right foundations model? I'm not talking about HTML or whatnot. I have some sort of medium, copper, fiber whatever and I would like to send 10 bytes to the other side of it. What is the right foundations that would lead to an implementation which isn't overly complex.

Not a direct answer, but Ethernet is sometimes brought up as a successful example of Worse is Better. At one point Token Ring was a serious competitor - it had careful designs to avoid collisions when the network was busy, prioritize traffic, etc. But it was comparatively slow and expensive. Ethernet just says "eh, retry on collision.". And that simplistic foundation has carried on to where we have a standard for 800…

Since speed and expense are relatively important and collisions are relatively rare, this sounds more like "better is better".

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#317

Post by Log_out_ »

adastra22 wrote: post #270
Log_out_ wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its indistinguishable from fantasy extrapolating from the given track record . Previous fantasy technology break through like harbor bosch were viable only "after" major diaasters and worldwars and brought with them ever more destructive hidden costs.

Haber-Bosch predates the world wars.

But was only usefull with free trade guarantees by a sea empire. In colonial empire times it might aswell have been alchemy to make free cheese on the moon.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#318

Post by [deleted] »

th43o2i4234234 wrote: post #227

The critical point of the article holds true of everything in human social networks (be it religion/culture/philosophy/apps/industry...). If you don't achieve virality, you're as good as dead. Once a episteme/meme spreads like wild-fire there's very little chance for a reassessment based on value/function - because the scope is now the big axis of valuation. It's actually worse because humanity is now a single big bo…

[deleted]

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#319

Post by kagevf »

Arch-TK wrote: post #272

I have a theory that the worse is better approach begets an environment where the worse is better approach is better. At least hypothetically, I think there's an approach which is not "the right thing" or "worse is better" but rather more like "the right foundations". Most interface complexity in my experience seems to be inherited from underlying interface complexity, and it takes a lot of work to fix that underlyin…

> the worse is better approach is better.

I think this ties back to the idea of "get it working, then once it's working go back and make it fast | preformant | better for whatever meaning of better".

I think much of the consternation towards "worse is better" comes from re-inventing things to achieve the "make it better" improvements from scratch instead of leveraging existing knowledge. Re-inventing might be fine, but we shouldn't throw away knowledge and establshed techniques if we can avoid it.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#320

Post by epcoa »

bccdee wrote: post #311
tightbookkeeper wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust is not very popular in terms of number of users. It’s just over represented in online discussion.

It made it into the Linux kernel, and it's still a relatively young language. I don't think any language has made such a large impact since Java or Javascript, both of which are nearly 30 years old now.

Go?? Ruby and Python I think count, Ruby is a JS contemporary and Python is close enough, no one paid it any attention before the late 90s. Rust is still struggling in the domain it wants to live (a C++ replacement), I still have a suspicion that a new new C++ will ultimately come along and dominate before Rust eats the big money where C++ still lives. And I say this as someone who has been rooting for Rust since stumbling upon Graydon's proposal in 2006 while swearing at yet another C++ monstrosity (though a moneymaking one).
Post reply on HN