5 ms·

I didn't make it past the first paragraph because I really can't stand the worst logic flaw in web performance being turned into a worldview. Hiding glaring fla

I didn't make it past the first paragraph because I really can't stand the worst logic flaw in web performance being turned into a worldview. Hiding glaring flaws behind averages by just trying to overwhelm the average with a much higher volume of "good" traffic. If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing for those people.

solveit 7y ago
> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing. I can't conceive of the mental contortions you must have forced yourself into to conclude that a world of 600 million people, all in abject poverty, is just as good the world we live in now.
- cagenut 7y ago
  edited in a "for those people" to be clearer.
  - solveit 7y ago
    Yeah, but the other people matter too...
datashow 7y ago
> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing. No. They are not the same thing. Error rate does not automatically drop when requests grow. The number of errors remains the same, but the number of "good" increases, how is that "the exact same thing"? Also, 1 billion world population was in 1800s, at that time poverty rate was 80%.
Isinlor 7y ago
You should look at the data and not invent some silly comparisons to error rates. Poverty is declining both in absolute and relative terms. There is less poor people now than there was 10 years ago. https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty
- mpax 7y ago
  Those data on poverty are a joke! Read for example: https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/4/27/200-years-to-end-poverty https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/4/27/200-years-to-end-... It's basically the World Bank covering its ass for its own spectacular failure.

solveit 7y ago

> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing. I can't conceive of the mental contortions you must have forced yourself into to conclude that a world of 600 million people, all in abject poverty, is just as good the world we live in now.

cagenut 7y ago
edited in a "for those people" to be clearer.
- solveit 7y ago
  Yeah, but the other people matter too...

datashow 7y ago

> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing. No. They are not the same thing. Error rate does not automatically drop when requests grow. The number of errors remains the same, but the number of "good" increases, how is that "the exact same thing"? Also, 1 billion world population was in 1800s, at that time poverty rate was 80%.

Isinlor 7y ago

You should look at the data and not invent some silly comparisons to error rates. Poverty is declining both in absolute and relative terms. There is less poor people now than there was 10 years ago. https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty

mpax 7y ago
Those data on poverty are a joke! Read for example: https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/4/27/200-years-to-end-poverty https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/4/27/200-years-to-end-... It's basically the World Bank covering its ass for its own spectacular failure.