3 ms·

My interpretation of the above comment isn't that software will always be "bad", more that software will never be perfect. If software were perfect, then it wou

My interpretation of the above comment isn't that software will always be "bad", more that software will never be perfect. If software were perfect, then it would scale 1:1 with the complexity of the problem at hand (no matter how you define it). No human is perfect; humans write software; therefore software will be imperfect.

runawaybottle 5y ago
Misanthropes generally resort to this world view with respect to humanity because we (outing myself) believe human nature always reveals itself (eg - line up for toilet paper at the beginning of the pandemic). We are resigned to the feeling that ‘it’s never gonna get fixed’. It’s not a good way to be, and to see this worldview permeate into objective areas of life is even more depressing. Misanthropy kind of absolves humanity of it’s nature. What I don’t like to see in software is that type of absolution for code we know is obviously not pragmatic. It’s a tough debate because often the perpetrators of complex abstraction layers don’t believe it’s bad (any number of us could have been the guilty party at some point or another): I think we should still try to be optimistic about openly debating complexity, or else we risk allowing misanthropic perceptions to enter this realm too - ‘people just suck at programming, so be it’.
- tenaciousDaniel 5y ago
  On the subject of cultural resignation, I'm totally with you. It's not a good way to go about life. Though I don't think it's required to come away from my comment with that conclusion. There's plenty of space between "things will never be perfect" and "things will never be better". Software can definitely be better, it's just important to not worry too much about perfection - it really is the enemy of the good.
  - sitkack 5y ago
    I am a naively optimistic stoic nihilist that knows humans can do waaay better than we are, at basically everything. But one can hold both of the opposing views of what the upscussion is talking about in human nature and misanthropy. Good architecture encourages the right decisions. So we can both accept that human nature will "come out" and also strive to help our fellow humans make the best possible decisions in light of that. Anything else is not being true to ourselves and the situation.
qayxc 5y ago
It goes deeper than that. There is intrinsic irreducible complexity that comes with many problems and there's no way to fix that. Software solutions also cannot scale linearly with the complexity of the problem. In fact, it's provably outright impossible to even calculate the complexity of a problem in general, let alone find the optimal (as in least complex) solution (see Komolgorov complexity).

runawaybottle 5y ago

Misanthropes generally resort to this world view with respect to humanity because we (outing myself) believe human nature always reveals itself (eg - line up for toilet paper at the beginning of the pandemic). We are resigned to the feeling that ‘it’s never gonna get fixed’. It’s not a good way to be, and to see this worldview permeate into objective areas of life is even more depressing. Misanthropy kind of absolves humanity of it’s nature. What I don’t like to see in software is that type of absolution for code we know is obviously not pragmatic. It’s a tough debate because often the perpetrators of complex abstraction layers don’t believe it’s bad (any number of us could have been the guilty party at some point or another): I think we should still try to be optimistic about openly debating complexity, or else we risk allowing misanthropic perceptions to enter this realm too - ‘people just suck at programming, so be it’.

tenaciousDaniel 5y ago
On the subject of cultural resignation, I'm totally with you. It's not a good way to go about life. Though I don't think it's required to come away from my comment with that conclusion. There's plenty of space between "things will never be perfect" and "things will never be better". Software can definitely be better, it's just important to not worry too much about perfection - it really is the enemy of the good.
- sitkack 5y ago
  I am a naively optimistic stoic nihilist that knows humans can do waaay better than we are, at basically everything. But one can hold both of the opposing views of what the upscussion is talking about in human nature and misanthropy. Good architecture encourages the right decisions. So we can both accept that human nature will "come out" and also strive to help our fellow humans make the best possible decisions in light of that. Anything else is not being true to ourselves and the situation.

qayxc 5y ago

It goes deeper than that. There is intrinsic irreducible complexity that comes with many problems and there's no way to fix that. Software solutions also cannot scale linearly with the complexity of the problem. In fact, it's provably outright impossible to even calculate the complexity of a problem in general, let alone find the optimal (as in least complex) solution (see Komolgorov complexity).