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

91–100 of 351 posts

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#91

Post by sceptic123 »

pjc50 wrote: post #41
NAHWheatCracker wrote: post #11

I'll never understand the obsession with LISP. My guess is it just appeals to a certain type of person, sort of academic in my view. I'm not convinced that LISP was ever the-right-thing. The author didn't express anything about LISP vs C except to assert that C was a 50% solution and LISP was better. I agree though that for practical purposes, practical solutions are just going to be more successful.

Over the years I've developed what I call the "lefthanded scissors" analogy: people assume that everyone's mind is wired the same way and that all good programmers are good in the same way and think in the same way, but what if that's not true? What if different people have a predisposition (like lefthandedness) to prefer different tools? Then a righthanded person picks up the lefthanded scissors and deems them weird…

I would say the analogy fails because it's not about discomfort or weirdness (or taste); left-handed scissors just don't work if you try to use them right-handed. But right-handed scissors don't work if you try to use them left-handed either.

So it's not about taste or preference, left handed people learn how to use right-handed scissors, but they can also use left handed scissors in a way that a right-handed person would struggle to.

All that said, the analogy still works because most people don't understand why it doesn't work.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#92

Post by pm215 »

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…

Seems like it could be rather expensive to retrofit, compared to cost of putting it in the house to start with (certainly I couldn't imagine getting it retrofitted into my UK house -- the labour alone to dig channels into walls and then make good again and redecorate would dwarf the equipment cost). But the thing about features put in a house when it's built is that they have to meet the economic bar of "do potential buyers value them enough to pay XYZ more than they otherwise would", which can be quite hard. If the average buyer wouldn't value the house at an extra $1000 then it's not worth the builder installing one...

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#93

Post by samatman »

kragen wrote: post #82
kqr wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not convinced that LISP was ever the-right-thing. Remember that this has to be read in historical context. At the time C was invented, things like garbage collection, message-passing object-orientation, generics, rich sets of conditionals, first-class functions, etc. were brand spanking new. They were The Right Thing to do (even judged in the harsh light of hindsight), but also quite complicated to implement –…

This paper was written in 01991. Garbage collection is from 01959. Message-passing (aka object-orientation) is from 01972. C is from 01973. If by "generics" you mean parametric polymorphism, those were added to Ada and C++ in the mid-80s, after having been invented in ML in 01973; in a sense they're an attempt to bring the virtues of dynamically-typed languages like Lisp to statically-typed languages. Even today, I d…

> > At the time C was invented

> C is from 01973.

> Some of these things were brand spanking new in 01973

...right. The Rise of Worse is Better is a memoir, it's set in the past.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#94

Post by kayodelycaon »

pjc50 wrote: post #41
NAHWheatCracker wrote: post #11

I'll never understand the obsession with LISP. My guess is it just appeals to a certain type of person, sort of academic in my view. I'm not convinced that LISP was ever the-right-thing. The author didn't express anything about LISP vs C except to assert that C was a 50% solution and LISP was better. I agree though that for practical purposes, practical solutions are just going to be more successful.

Over the years I've developed what I call the "lefthanded scissors" analogy: people assume that everyone's mind is wired the same way and that all good programmers are good in the same way and think in the same way, but what if that's not true? What if different people have a predisposition (like lefthandedness) to prefer different tools? Then a righthanded person picks up the lefthanded scissors and deems them weird…

> What if that's not true?

It is definitely not true. The existence of neurodivergence is proof enough.

I can visualize an entire application in my head like it is a forest. I can fly around and see various parts and how they fit together. I am unable to juggle the tokens necessary to do logic and basic math in my head but I have no trouble reading a graph in understanding the relationships between numbers.

No matter how many times I try to read it, Lisp is completely inscrutable to me. It requires the same token juggling math does.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#96

Post by anthk »

kragen wrote: post #82
kqr wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not convinced that LISP was ever the-right-thing. Remember that this has to be read in historical context. At the time C was invented, things like garbage collection, message-passing object-orientation, generics, rich sets of conditionals, first-class functions, etc. were brand spanking new. They were The Right Thing to do (even judged in the harsh light of hindsight), but also quite complicated to implement –…

This paper was written in 01991. Garbage collection is from 01959. Message-passing (aka object-orientation) is from 01972. C is from 01973. If by "generics" you mean parametric polymorphism, those were added to Ada and C++ in the mid-80s, after having been invented in ML in 01973; in a sense they're an attempt to bring the virtues of dynamically-typed languages like Lisp to statically-typed languages. Even today, I d…

Ever used SBCL?

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#97

Post by orwin »

ripap wrote: post #12
orwin wrote: post #6

This... Honestly the first lines seemed I thought this was an arrogant take, but he made _really_ good point and now I tend to agree with him. Still I am a bit bothered, does a counterargument exist?

Worse is Better is Worse: https://www.dreamsongs.com/Files/worse-is-worse.pdf Same author (name is an anagram).

I wish i could upvote you more than once. This is a very good counterargument.

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#98

Post by anthk »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #68
NAHWheatCracker wrote: post #11

I'll never understand the obsession with LISP. My guess is it just appeals to a certain type of person, sort of academic in my view. I'm not convinced that LISP was ever the-right-thing. The author didn't express anything about LISP vs C except to assert that C was a 50% solution and LISP was better. I agree though that for practical purposes, practical solutions are just going to be more successful.

See these demos for the kinds of interactive systems LISP enabled back in the day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4-YnLpLgtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV5obrYaogU It makes working on VSCode today look like banging rocks together, let alone 30 years ago.

And today with Lem/Emacs+slime+sbcl

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#99

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: The Rise of Worse Is Better (1991)

#100

Post by samatman »

ripap wrote: post #12
orwin wrote: post #6

This... Honestly the first lines seemed I thought this was an arrogant take, but he made _really_ good point and now I tend to agree with him. Still I am a bit bothered, does a counterargument exist?

Worse is Better is Worse: https://www.dreamsongs.com/Files/worse-is-worse.pdf Same author (name is an anagram).

May as well complete the set: Is Worse Really Better? https://dreamsongs.com/Files/IsWorseReallyBetter.pdf

Also: Nickieben Bourbaki might be an anagram of something, but it is definitely not an anagram of Richard Gabriel, with or without the P. There's no G, there's no h, there's an N and a k, it isn't even particularly close.

That claim is my best interpretation of this sentence:

> Same author (name is an anagram).

Although perhaps it was not your intention to connect the clauses in that way.

Post reply on HN