4 ms·

Fast. Fast always wins. Trying something, regardless of outcome teaches something about the world. The more trials, the more you roll the dice, the more you lea

by jfoutz 2y ago

Fast. Fast always wins. Trying something, regardless of outcome teaches something about the world. The more trials, the more you roll the dice, the more you learn. I really hate being wrong, but it is much better to be wrong a lot, and quickly understand why. The alternative is to try nothing. It’s kinda sad.

0xFF0123 2y ago
It does depend on the domain though. Sometimes moving slowly and carefully can result in a faster successful outcome than throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks.
KingOfCoders 2y ago
Yes, sure fast wins when building a bridge. Or a tunnel. Which then collapses. Safe wins, this is not Facebook where people share some holiday pictures. "but it is much better to be wrong a lot" I disagree, "Oh the bridge collapesed, I was wrong! But this is much better than being right" - Nope.
- trelane 2y ago
  If you're opposed to fast and cheap, I have great news for you about the cost and pace of construction in the US.
  - jajko 2y ago
    ... which has its own reasons, namely regulations (you know, every time there was a new disaster they added another one) or maybe some corruption. You don't see bridges falling in US regularly killing tons of folks, do you. I am not saying its ideal and there is no room for improvement, nothing in real world is, but please consider other, 'fast' scenarios for long term (100+ years) existence when not only many lives are at stake.
    - trelane 2y ago
      > You don't see bridges falling in US regularly killing tons of folks, do you. Falling yes. Killing is hit-or miss. I would be surprised if the reasons bridges are failing due to lack of maintenance is entirely unrelated to the cost of building. There are many ways things could be better, and many ways things could be worse. Attacking something only because it's cheaper and faster seems silly.
      - jajko 2y ago
        Please share a single recent example from US, I am only aware of one relatively recent catastrophic case from northern Italy, where maintenance was subpar. Cheaper reflects many things, overall quality testing, attention to detail, how much effort went into design etc. Its not a silver bullet but oh boy does it always show on result, without exception.
        trelane 2y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_colla... was not 2 months ago. > Its not a silver bullet but oh boy does it always show on result, without exception. Permit me to show you an exception! This watch is USD59: https://www.target.com/p/men-39-s-timex-expedition-scout-watch-with-nylon-strap-gray-black-green-t49961jt/-/A-17287304 https://www.target.com/p/men-39-s-timex-expedition-scout-wat... This watch is GBP225: https://mrjoneswatches.com/products/a-perfectly-useless-evening https://mrjoneswatches.com/products/a-perfectly-useless-even... There are even more extreme examples, e.g. the watch from Richistan.
Ntrails 2y ago
> The more trials, the more you roll the dice, the more you learn. If you have infinite dice rolls this is obviously true. If every dice roll costs you something or indeed everything... heh. Maybe don't just roll it to see what happens?
acdha 2y ago
Fast wins for something like mobile apps but not infrastructure where safety matters and you can’t just shrug off liability. The Boring Company is a great example: fast to market themselves but almost all of their projects have fallen through.
- vlovich123 2y ago
  Iteration always wins. There may be other constraining factors, but if you can violate those to iterate more (i.e. cheat), you’ll beat your competitors who honor those constraints. This has nothing to do with the success or failure of any given company.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    > but if you can violate those to iterate more (i.e. cheat), you’ll beat your competitors who honor those constraints. Until people die. Then suddenly, you can't cheat any more. And everybody else has to live with your decisions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Thiokol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Thiokol I wouldn't call that winning.
    - vlovich123 2y ago
      You seem to have misunderstood what I’m saying. Iteration is how you learn. Learning through iteration, which is known under various names like Wright’s law or more generally experience curve effects [1], goes hand in hand with economies of scale in driving down costs. Yes, iteration requires you to survive. Not sure how that’s relevant. Cutting corners also isn’t necessarily a bad thing - you’re focusing on the extreme example where people die. Cutting corners can also be a careful evaluation of what processes are and aren’t relevant to a given situation but that becomes trickier when it’s enshrined in law. Imagine if guidelines from the 80s about how to write software were enshrined in law. Regulations more often than not do ignore the flip side in terms of the cost of compliance because it’s difficult to show the counter factual universe in which a regulation may save 10% more lives (or maybe even 0% more lives) but drove up costs by 100x. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects

by jfoutz 2y ago

0xFF0123 2y ago

It does depend on the domain though. Sometimes moving slowly and carefully can result in a faster successful outcome than throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks.

KingOfCoders 2y ago

Yes, sure fast wins when building a bridge. Or a tunnel. Which then collapses. Safe wins, this is not Facebook where people share some holiday pictures. "but it is much better to be wrong a lot" I disagree, "Oh the bridge collapesed, I was wrong! But this is much better than being right" - Nope.

trelane 2y ago
If you're opposed to fast and cheap, I have great news for you about the cost and pace of construction in the US.
- jajko 2y ago
  ... which has its own reasons, namely regulations (you know, every time there was a new disaster they added another one) or maybe some corruption. You don't see bridges falling in US regularly killing tons of folks, do you. I am not saying its ideal and there is no room for improvement, nothing in real world is, but please consider other, 'fast' scenarios for long term (100+ years) existence when not only many lives are at stake.
  - trelane 2y ago
    > You don't see bridges falling in US regularly killing tons of folks, do you. Falling yes. Killing is hit-or miss. I would be surprised if the reasons bridges are failing due to lack of maintenance is entirely unrelated to the cost of building. There are many ways things could be better, and many ways things could be worse. Attacking something only because it's cheaper and faster seems silly.
    - jajko 2y ago
      Please share a single recent example from US, I am only aware of one relatively recent catastrophic case from northern Italy, where maintenance was subpar. Cheaper reflects many things, overall quality testing, attention to detail, how much effort went into design etc. Its not a silver bullet but oh boy does it always show on result, without exception.
      - trelane 2y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_colla... was not 2 months ago. > Its not a silver bullet but oh boy does it always show on result, without exception. Permit me to show you an exception! This watch is USD59: https://www.target.com/p/men-39-s-timex-expedition-scout-watch-with-nylon-strap-gray-black-green-t49961jt/-/A-17287304 https://www.target.com/p/men-39-s-timex-expedition-scout-wat... This watch is GBP225: https://mrjoneswatches.com/products/a-perfectly-useless-evening https://mrjoneswatches.com/products/a-perfectly-useless-even... There are even more extreme examples, e.g. the watch from Richistan.

Ntrails 2y ago

> The more trials, the more you roll the dice, the more you learn. If you have infinite dice rolls this is obviously true. If every dice roll costs you something or indeed everything... heh. Maybe don't just roll it to see what happens?

acdha 2y ago

Fast wins for something like mobile apps but not infrastructure where safety matters and you can’t just shrug off liability. The Boring Company is a great example: fast to market themselves but almost all of their projects have fallen through.

vlovich123 2y ago
Iteration always wins. There may be other constraining factors, but if you can violate those to iterate more (i.e. cheat), you’ll beat your competitors who honor those constraints. This has nothing to do with the success or failure of any given company.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  > but if you can violate those to iterate more (i.e. cheat), you’ll beat your competitors who honor those constraints. Until people die. Then suddenly, you can't cheat any more. And everybody else has to live with your decisions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Thiokol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Thiokol I wouldn't call that winning.
  - vlovich123 2y ago
    You seem to have misunderstood what I’m saying. Iteration is how you learn. Learning through iteration, which is known under various names like Wright’s law or more generally experience curve effects [1], goes hand in hand with economies of scale in driving down costs. Yes, iteration requires you to survive. Not sure how that’s relevant. Cutting corners also isn’t necessarily a bad thing - you’re focusing on the extreme example where people die. Cutting corners can also be a careful evaluation of what processes are and aren’t relevant to a given situation but that becomes trickier when it’s enshrined in law. Imagine if guidelines from the 80s about how to write software were enshrined in law. Regulations more often than not do ignore the flip side in terms of the cost of compliance because it’s difficult to show the counter factual universe in which a regulation may save 10% more lives (or maybe even 0% more lives) but drove up costs by 100x. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects