Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse
-
@lucas1 said in Is Computer Software Art or Science....:
@blakeyrat said in Is Computer Software Art or Science....:
Right; and a lot of that is nobody in this industry learns from the past and so the same mistakes get repeated over and over and over.
Plenty do, the problem is that you haven't learned from the past.
There is a "worse is better" principle in almost every endeavour. It is one of the reasons why *nix is still prevalent even though the system is based on tons of work around Dennis Richie did in the 70s.
Most of the time 80% good is good enough.
Another one of those gibberish Linux mottos. Sorry, is open source like Roadhouse? "Pain don't hurt"?
No worse is worse. By definition.
@lucas1 said in Is Computer Software Art or Science....:
Stack Overflow.
Stack Overflow got worse when exposed to millions of users, because then it attracted in all the mini-Hitlers who love to "moderate" forums like that and SO has no mechanics to get rid of them.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Another one of those gibberish Linux mottos.
Why do you think it's gibberish?
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
No worse is worse. By definition.
Ah, I think I see the problem. You're applying the usages of "worst" and "better" to the same metric. The joke is that they aren't. But it's also possible that lucas wasn't using it in the way it was originally intended, though I'm not completely convinced on that.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Another one of those gibberish Linux mottos. Sorry, is open source like Roadhouse? "Pain don't hurt"?
No worse is worse. By definition.Err no it isn't. In fact it is a criticism of *nix from the late 80s / early 90s.
Again you don't understand the principle of cost benefit analysis or simply don't want to try to win an argument.
Quite simply making something up to your lofty standards is not only costly but also undesirable. Requirements change over time, it is simply better to have something that is good enough at the time rather than to have something that is super well engineered. By the time people have built it right, it might have to change anyway.
The German's were beaten in WWII because even while they had superior Tanks and Equipment for the age, they took too long to make. The USSR could build lots of tanks that while weren't as good, however they could make soo much more of them it didn't matter if they were a bit crap.
The same principle applies in software, manufacturing and Starcraft.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Stack Overflow got worse when exposed to millions of users, because then it attracted in all the mini-Hitlers who love to "moderate" forums like that and SO has no mechanics to get rid of them.
That isn't a software problem, that is a community problem.
Again it is a resource I think we all use regularly for help and work well for the vast majority of users, which I am sure you will insist everyone else is a moron and you are the enlightened.
-
I think there's a lot of merit to the "Unix philosophy" of "keep things simple", but it's not as straightforward as "Linuxers" think.
Yes, overengineering can be a thing, and it's bad. Overengineering doesn't mean "too much engineering", it means bad engineering. Good engineering will build all the things you need, and no more.
There is also a common fallacy I've noticed in software design: "passing the buck", or pushing the complexity out of your system and claiming it's better. Like, someone says "look how clean and simple our design is!", but in reality they've just left the ugly work for others to do. So for example, people look at Windows, with the many, many system components like a GUI or a registry or management tools, and they compare it to a barebones Linux kernel and shell.
Yes, the Linux kernel is based on very simple concepts, basically processes, pipes and files. But all the complexity that you don't put there has to go somewhere else. At least one other piece of software will have to implement unicode stuff, XML decoders, OpenGL libraries, compatibility shims for software using older versions of those libraries, GUI toolkits, etc.
In short, you can only reduce the complexity of a system by removing functionality you don't need, or removing duplicate implementations of things, which are both very good things, yes, but after that is done, you're already at the ideal minimum, and "less is more" stops applying.
(There's also the fallacy of visibility. You can tinker with the insides of Linux, but not Windows, so it naturally feels like Linux is more modular and better designed while Windows is a big monolith)
-
A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUCEMENT:
I use MacOS, Windows and OpenBSD ... I do not use Linux.
-
@anonymous234 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Yes, the Linux kernel is based on very simple concepts, basically processes, pipes and files. But all the complexity that you don't put there has to go somewhere else. At least one other piece of software will have to implement unicode stuff, XML decoders, OpenGL libraries, compatibility shims for software using older versions of those libraries, GUI toolkits, etc.
A good example of this is the move from X11 to Wayland. Sure Wayland is simpler, but there's a ton of problems that X11 solved but Wayland does not. Wayland also relies on applications to do things like font anti-aliasing, DPI-scaling, screen rotation, etc. (And while that stuff was frequently wrong in X11, you know, you know, most applications are also going to get that wrong.)
-
@blakeyrat most applications realistically are going to be in on of the big *nix toolkits. Which obviously do support it.
I also like how you always wimp out when you are basically proven wrong with my first reply. You always seem not to reply to it because it just proves you completely wrong.
I am sure btw your responses are going to be like "I dunno what you mean by <X>" (even while be been talking it all the while) and "I dunno what you mean by <insert well known phrase>".
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
to be in on of the
Huh.
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Which obviously do support it.
Yeah but do they support it correctly? Like, GTK+ has a open dialog in Windows, but it's totally useless and wrong.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Huh.
Huh.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Yeah but do they support it correctly? Like, GTK+ has a open dialog in Windows, but it's totally useless and wrong.
Well we aren't discussing GTK on fucking Windows. You keep on moving the goalposts.
You spoke about X11 to Wayland. FFS.
Why don't you bring up about how Amiga OS 3.9 doesn't support 4K.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Well we aren't discussing GTK on fucking Windows.
Right; but if they can't get this shit right on the most popular OS ever made, why should I have any confidence they could get it right on the OS used by less than 1% of desktop users?
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
You spoke about X11 to Wayland. FFS.
Right.
X11 is complicated, but sucks because it was built on a lot of bad assumptions (for example, that no permissions should be enforced between GUI apps) and a lot of 1970s technology. It's bad.
Wayland is modern, but it's also bad. It offloads work it should be doing to the application programmer. It doesn't support remote control nearly as well as X11 did. It supports few of the features that competing display layers in OS X and Windows do. It's not forward progress; at best it's a side-step.
-
@blakeyrat As per usual this is besides the point tbh. This is why I don't hang around with my co-workers, they are like you.
They are petty individuals that never want to see the overall outcome and rather spend decades on crap that doesn't matter, making sure their outlook meeting and timesheets look right.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@blakeyrat As per usual this is besides the point tbh. This is why I don't hang around with my co-workers, they are like you.
They are petty individuals that never want to see the overall outcome and rather spend decades on crap that doesn't matter, making sure their outlook meeting and timesheets look right.
The only valid criticisms are the ones that come from you, eh?
-
@lucas1 Quick question, who is it who controls what is the correct subject in a thread? Perhaps the person who started it? Who you are saying is missing the point? Of his own thread?
-
@magus You notice the second part of the thread title, that was because of what I said.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
As per usual this is besides the point tbh.
What is?
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
They are petty individuals that never want to see the overall outcome and rather spend decades on crap that doesn't matter,
You mean like making a new rendering layer for Linux that doesn't learn any of the lessons from OS X or Windows (or even really X11) in the last 20 years? That kind of spending decades on crap?
-
@pie_flavor He completely missed the point of everything I said. So yeah why not go off on a tangent.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
You mean like making a new rendering layer for Linux that doesn't learn any of the lessons from OS X or Windows (or even really X11) in the last 20 years? That kind of spending decades on crap?
I didn't say anything about whether or not that was good. I don't care.
The point that the "worse is better" principle is a thing and a well known concept to anyone that has been around the software engineering space.
I highlighted why it was better and you went on another rant about how libX on platform Y was better.
You don't address any direct criticisms, you just move the goal posts.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
The point that the "worse is better" principle is a thing and a well known concept to anyone that has been around the software engineering space.
I'm not arguing that it's not "a thing", or not a well-known concept. I'm arguing that it's shitty and stupid.
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
I highlighted why it was better and you went on another rant about how libX on platform Y was better.
When did I do that? What are you talking about? You mean my response to anonymous?
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
I'm not arguing that it's not "a thing", or not a well-known concept. I'm arguing that it's shitty and stupid.
It is called reality. Is reality shitty or stupid.
In any sort of engineering profession you will have to make concessions. You will make long lasting mistakes. That is life.
Pretending it doesn't happen or pretending people are perfect and Utopian world where they have an infinite amount of time to complete a task is ridiculous.
Do you even live by your own standards?
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
When did I do that? What are you talking about? You mean my response to anonymous?
No I did that, you were just shit.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
It is called reality. Is reality shitty or stupid.
Yes. What a stupid question.
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
In any sort of engineering profession you will have to make concessions.
Like hot dogs and popcorn?
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Pretending it doesn't happen or pretending people are perfect and Utopian world where they have an infinite amount of time to complete a task is ridiculous.
Maybe. But the fact remains that AOL Instant Messenger circa 1999 was a far better piece of software than any instant messenging app in use today. Any of them. Night-and-day better.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Yes. What a stupid question.
No Question mark ... not a question. Try to actually read what I said. It is a rhetorical question you dumb fuck.
I am not going to read the rest of the reply as you cannot discern a question from a statement.
-
@lucas1 A grammar critique from the person who typed "to be in on of the". Just what I wanted.
I'm dyslexic, what's your excuse?
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Maybe. But the fact remains that AOL Instant Messenger circa 1999 was a far better piece of software than any instant messenging app in use today. Any of them. Night-and-day better.
Err whatever. Slack is better than AOL by loads.
BTW I have used
- ICQ
- AOL
- MSN
- IRC
- SKYPE
- DISCORD
- FB Message
- WhatsApp.
Slack is pretty damn good.
So I disagree.
-
@blakeyrat I typoed, you are about 2 years behind the rest of them on shitting on me.
If you have a real criticism please highlight it.
I'm dyslexic, what's your excuse?
I am dyslexic and dyspraxic. So fuck off with that excuse bullshit. I don't do it.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
I am dyslexic and dyspraxic. So fuck off with that excuse bullshit. I don't do it.
Lemme guess, you're also lactose intolerant, allergic to glucose, and a self-diagnosed autistic?
-
@blakeyrat Nope. I have said several times in the past both me and my brother are dyslexic.
I've had said my several times on here my father, my uncle and my brother can barely read e.g. when me and my brother was playing GTA Vice City on the PS2 he didn't know what to do on missions unless his Girlfriend would read out the mission statements for him, or I was there to read it for him.
I happen to be dyspraxic and dyslexic. However I am not badly dyslexic like my father, uncle and brothers.
https://dyspraxiafoundation.org.uk/about-dyspraxia/
So get bent, I don't make up disabilities to look unique.
-
@lucas1 Well it's really not your biggest problem anyway. Your biggest problem is that you're a blow-hard who never listens to anybody and don't really know much at all.
-
@blakeyrat You are such a cunt. I listened plenty to you and responded plenty of times in a manner that was fair and reasoned.
You decided to try to win. You then tried to pull the disabled card. Couldn't win that way and then go errr ... you are dumb cunt.
Fuck off with you bullshit. I can see through your shite.
-
@blakeyrat YES MR DYSLEXIC THAT SPELLS EVERYTHING PERFECTLY.
You aren't dyslexic you make far too few mistakes for me to believe that. You are a lying cunt.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Err whatever. Slack is better than AOL by loads.
Slack isn't an instant-messaging app. IM clients are primarily based on friends lists and direct contact rather than group chats.
-
@e4tmyl33t I can send instant messages to people ... lets stop splitting hairs please. Skype does IM, Desktop share, Calls as well and I would call that an IM app.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
You mean like making a new rendering layer for Linux that doesn't learn any of the lessons from OS X or Windows (or even really X11) in the last 20 years? That kind of spending decades on crap?
It is kind of interesting (while completely tangential to the discussion) to note that a lot of people who agree with you that X is way better than Wayland (due to things like network transparency) are UNIX nerds who also think that Wayland is too much the Windows style approach.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Pretending it doesn't happen or pretending people are perfect and Utopian world where they have an infinite amount of time to complete a task is ridiculous.
You cannot defend the fact that you answered a completely different question with your perception that the original question wasn't useful.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
I am dyslexic and dyspraxic. So fuck off with that excuse bullshit. I don't do it.
Lemme guess, you're also lactose intolerant, allergic to glucose, and a self-diagnosed autistic?
Comes of being a caveman, his digestive system hasn't adapted to those.
-
@pie_flavor I didn't. You just just think I did. Like Blakey you are just ignore the whole point to score points.
That is upto you. If you fancy doing that all day I find that fun.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@e4tmyl33t I can send instant messages to people ... lets stop splitting hairs please. Skype does IM, Desktop share, Calls as well and I would call that an IM app.
Yes. And Slack is oriented towards communities, which turns it from an IM app to a chat app.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@pie_flavor I didn't. You just just think I did.
You literally just used those exact premises to defend yourself.
-
@pie_flavor Nope.
-
@pie_flavor I wasn't replying to you numbnuts.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@pie_flavor I wasn't replying to you numbnuts.
The idiocy is apparent to all, don't worry.
-
@pie_flavor I am sure it was, as you complained about me replying to another person.
BTW fucker, not seen one concrete criticism of any of my positions. Lots of name calling though.
-
@lucas1 said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
@pie_flavor I am sure it was, as you complained about me replying to another person.
BTW fucker, not seen one concrete criticism of any of my positions. Lots of name calling though.
The name calling comes after the concrete criticism arrives and you blinkeredly discount all of it.
-
@topspin said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
It is kind of interesting (while completely tangential to the discussion) to note that a lot of people who agree with you that X is way better than Wayland (due to things like network transparency) are UNIX nerds who also think that Wayland is too much the Windows style approach.
Wayland is almost nothing like the Windows-style approach. That's ridiculous.
The problem is that both X11 and Wayland have huge fundamental flaws. I agree that X11 isn't salvageable and should be ripped-out, but the real challenge is that Wayland isn't better.
-
@pie_flavor Step 1 never happened.
A concrete criticism please.
-
@blakeyrat said in Re: Is Computer Software Art or Science.... Lucas1 is worse is better is worse:
Maybe. But the fact remains that AOL Instant Messenger circa 1999 was a far better piece of software than any instant messenging app in use today. Any of them. Night-and-day better.
You're higher than a hundred hippies.
-
BTW fucker, not seen one concrete criticism of any of my positions. Lots of name calling though.
Well let me be first
, your positions suck. Please please peruse the Kama Sutra. You're starting to bore me.
-
@m_adams I don't study yoga shite. NEXT!
Worse is better - Wikipedia
