> The correct lesson is that the real world is not obliged to conform to your personal model of "better". (Annoying as fuck, that. ;-) And that seems to indic

> The correct lesson is that the real world is not obliged to conform to your personal model of "better". (Annoying as fuck, that. ;-) And that seems to indicate that a(n initially) half-assed, but improvable, model of it that is then iterated upon is a good way to build one's model. Feels to me like that is exactly what "Worse is Better" is about -- shouldn't your beef here rather be with "the MIT model"? > You have a personal obligation to continuously adapt your model to match the real world. A bit hard to get a consensus model out of that, since everyone's perception of the real world -- heck, everyone's actual "real world" -- varies. > This is the model of science, and is opposed to Platonism. Again, what feels like setting up a Platonic ideal to me is more "the MIT model", rather than "Worse is Better". > After you have adjusted your model, it is certain to still not be right, and need further adjustment. Ah, dangit, at some point you just gotta say "Screw it, good enough!" (See, for instance, "The saddest 'Just ship it!' story" the other day.) [Edit: Reduced repetitive weasel wording.]