4 ms·
The idea that we only should examine and evaluate our systems if we have a better proposal already set is a dangerous one. If you don't understand the flaws in
by tedivm 6y ago
The idea that we only should examine and evaluate our systems if we have a better proposal already set is a dangerous one. If you don't understand the flaws in the first system any system you design after is doomed to repeat those flaws. At the same time the people who are criticizing a system may not be the best to design a new one, so putting up imaginary hurdles just works to protect the status quo.
- mindvirus 6y agoThat's a fair point, and I agree there is value in just identifying flaws. The flip side though is that it's easy to find flaws in any system since there's a large surface area - and the author is not just pointing out flaws, but saying the system is wrong. At the very least, I'd argue that we should hold people to at least trying to quantify the flaws they see in the system, especially when making such strong claims about it. Otherwise, how do we affect change?