4 ms·
Whether an implementation is bad is orthogonal to whether the idea itself is good.
by actionfromafar 2y ago
Whether an implementation is bad is orthogonal to whether the idea itself is good.
- sz4kerto 2y agoI don't agree fully. If some idea looks really good but implementations tend to be very problematic then the idea is likely presented incompletely or inaccurately, because it carries some hidden/non-apparent risk. Some good-looking ideas almost always result in beneficial implementations, some good-looking ideas almost always result in bad implementations.
- actionfromafar 2y agoSure, let's get to concrete things. What is a separate physical network worth, availability wise? Kind of hard to answer. It depends on the threat model. Even geography.
- ithkuil 2y agoIf all implementations of a "good" idea are bad then that's a strong indication that the "good" idea might have some significant flaws. If the "good" idea has some bad implementations as well as some good implementations (like the swedish network example?) then perhaps you shouldn't dismiss the "good" idea so quickly
- Xelbair 2y ago[flagged]
- cqqxo4zV46cp 2y agoUsing Latin words isn’t a suitable substitute for critical thought. You aren’t applying any here. There’s a clear difference between these two scenarios. The argument with communism tends to hinge on the assertion that there’s been no good real-world implementation of communism. Here, OP is asserting that an implementation is good. That’s yet to be refuted based on the actual characteristics of the implantation. You’re at the very least being tone deaf.
- roenxi 2y agoIn this case though the two things are closely intertwined. The reason we all use the internet is because it is the most fit-for-purpose network for moving bits around between intranets. If there was a substantially more effective way to do it then it'd be cheaper or better and we'd all migrate to it over time. Countless businesses at all levels of the abstraction stack labour to make the internet cheaper and more convenient (CDNs are unbelievable, I say!). So people choosing to create a new network are, with high confidence, going to end up with networks that are substantially worse at moving bits around cost effectively than the internet. The reality that they are inconvenient and expensive is built in once the deliberate choice is made to avoid the internet. It might be worth the cost, but the cost comes with the idea.
- 3np 2y agoNot sure what you are even refering to. Could you be specific? Got examples in mind?
- roenxi 2y agoHSCN was said to be imperfect. It is inherent in the idea of building something like HSCN that sometimes the implementation is just bad in some aspects. actionfromafar's objection to that (idea independent from implementation) is invalid, because inherent in the idea of building something like HSCN rather than just using the internet is that implementations will suffer from relative imperfect. The fact there are relative imperfections is baked in to the idea.