3 ms·
This POV is debateable (but I sympathize strongly with your sentiment). If quick but shitty allows me to capture a lot of value then quick and shitty might be t
by kriro 3y ago
This POV is debateable (but I sympathize strongly with your sentiment). If quick but shitty allows me to capture a lot of value then quick and shitty might be the way to go. Yes there are major downsides but especially in a "scaleup" setting they are often dwarfed by the upsides of shitty but fast. As an engineer, I hate it because I want to build perfect and long term all the time but in many cases you can't really argue with the monetary benefits of knowingly delivering underwhelming things that get the job done well enough for now (even knoing deep in your heart that many of the issues might never be fixed).
A good example is security. Sometimes it's righ to ship stuff with security issues that you know exist and might even be 10+ million dollar issues if discovered quickly if for example fixing thoses issues might interfere with adoption because they make user onboarding slightly more annoying.