3 ms·

I want also to add that the programming space, or software specification space, is also mindbogglingly big, if not bigger than the chemical space. People should

• fuzzfactor 5y ago
  >Everything around us has a billion-gazillion parameter space, and all we're seeing is just a chance occurrence. So true. Definitely one of the differentiators you can focus on when adding a software feature, is to consider the vast number of possibilities to accomplish it successfully. And with natural science like this it can be the vast number of possibilities that will never work, if there even exists one viable solution. Plus the biggest space will always be where there is no documentation since no experiments have yet been done. So the most promising stuff is when you don't know if what you want to do will even be possible. Therefore these type projects must always be started against this exact headwind. Which is why so few of them even get started. And when they do, they face the most oppressive noise-to-signal ratio and often need to do it for an ungodly long time before any real sign of success can even be seen on the horizon. When you think about it software projects might often be difficult to finish, while science projects more often are difficult to start.