5 ms·

I, too, can write vague parables to support just about any point. And what is the point? That it's always better to let the grassroots develop software? Like s

by chasing 14y ago

I, too, can write vague parables to support just about any point. And what is the point? That it's always better to let the grassroots develop software? Like so many other things in this world: It's Just Not That Simple.

donpark 14y ago
I think the core lesson is to build on actual need, not on anticipation of need.
- chasing 14y ago
  Really? You should never try to anticipate need? Ever? That's the lesson, here?
  - benihana 14y ago
    How did you get never try to anticipate need from what he said? He said the core lesson is build on actual need.
raldi 14y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "grassroots", but the lesson I took away is that it's often better to launch early and iterate based on user feedback, rather than dump a bunch of effort into making a product that people might not turn out to actually want.
- chasing 14y ago
  "Grassroots." A whole bunch of people built the second bridge based on their needs. The community. The parable in that article is not about one person iterating based on user feedback. It's about users taking action and building upon existing works. Which is awesome if everyone has similar needs. But what happens when that group-made bridge hangs too low and interferes with river traffic? Or if I think it should be redone with steel but you don't want to have it closed for a year while that happens? What if I think it helps my competitors too much, so I burn it and start a new bridge closer to where I want it? This is why we plan things. So everyone has a stake in the process and we can try to make good decisions that fit everyone's needs. Top-down planning isn't the only way to go, for sure, but this article is idiotic as far as making a point that community development is always the way to go. This is a simple parable that offers next-to-nothing as far as real world solutions except to say that, yes, we should make sure what we're building is useful. Which: No shit.
  - raldi 14y ago
    > but this article is idiotic as far as making a point that community development is always the way to go. What part of the article suggests that?
ChuckMcM 14y ago
Parables are, by their nature, designed to make you think about how you think about something. I know it is a kind of circular argument but the key is that people sometimes can't think outside the way they think. A parable is a way of bridging (sorry) that gap. In this parable person A is engineering solutions, they are told to build a bridge so they build a bridge. Person B is solving problems, the people on one side of the gorge want to trade with people on the other. As part of the problem solution a bridge is built. If the parable works, it kicks your thinking out of its rut for a moment so that you can ask yourself if there is something you are building/doing for the sake of doing it rather than because it solves a larger need. If you are, then you should consider what happens when you are done and everyone realizes it isn't really "needed." You can be ok with that, or not. But the key was you took a moment to think about it. Parables hack your thinking process.
- TeMPOraL 14y ago
  > person A is engineering solutions, (...) person B is solving problems. This. You managed to highlight a difference that is often forgot. I used to think mostly like person A, but the longer I stay on HN, the more I feel I start to think like person B.
sxcurry 14y ago
Agree - this type of parable may be suitable for small children, but if you think about it, it has zero information content, and no applicability to the real world. I'd much rather read a real story about a real bridge or two - that's what I come to HN for.
- raldi 14y ago
  Real world version: Google Wave is bridge #1. Edit: The CueCat is an even better example! Meanwhile, the transition of Amazon from bookseller to everything-seller to hardware maker to cloud company is a good example of a real-world Bridge #2 story. Or the transition of Justin.tv into Twitch.
  - yen223 14y ago
    The first iPhone is also bridge #1. An overly-designed gizmo that no one needed at the time. Hence its massive failure.
    - raldi 14y ago
      You're attacking a strawman. Nobody claimed Bridge 1 is always the wrong choice.
      - yen223 14y ago
        Sorry for the snark. I'm merely pointing out that the real world is a lot more nuanced than "Big design bad! Agile good!"
    - altrego99 14y ago
      The first iPhone was a bridge with a circus. Hence everybody went to see it, even though the toll was hefty. Some loved it so much, they even left their own village for good. In time a settlement grew around the circus. Now most people live around it. To see tigers and the zebras every morning became their way of life. No one lives in the old villages anymore, and who would - it doesn't even have a giraffe! Then came another bridge - little down the stream. This also had a circus, but with robots in it instead of animals. It became suddenly very popular for two things - 1) people are already used to living around a circus, and 2) the toll was way cheaper. Also robots were a novelty - who wants to see a giraffe when there are robots?
sesqu 14y ago
Reminds me of the best-selling parable of two mice and cheese, that I read before I had exposure to any real-world situations one might compare it with. I thought the story was moronic. The mice made stupid decisions based on available information, performed no secondary actions, and the suicidal one was the one we were supposed to emulate. Of course, I now understand a little better why people liked the story, but I'm glad I read it way back when I didn't.

by chasing 14y ago

donpark 14y ago

I think the core lesson is to build on actual need, not on anticipation of need.

chasing 14y ago
Really? You should never try to anticipate need? Ever? That's the lesson, here?
- benihana 14y ago
  How did you get never try to anticipate need from what he said? He said the core lesson is build on actual need.

raldi 14y ago

I'm not sure what you mean by "grassroots", but the lesson I took away is that it's often better to launch early and iterate based on user feedback, rather than dump a bunch of effort into making a product that people might not turn out to actually want.

chasing 14y ago
"Grassroots." A whole bunch of people built the second bridge based on their needs. The community. The parable in that article is not about one person iterating based on user feedback. It's about users taking action and building upon existing works. Which is awesome if everyone has similar needs. But what happens when that group-made bridge hangs too low and interferes with river traffic? Or if I think it should be redone with steel but you don't want to have it closed for a year while that happens? What if I think it helps my competitors too much, so I burn it and start a new bridge closer to where I want it? This is why we plan things. So everyone has a stake in the process and we can try to make good decisions that fit everyone's needs. Top-down planning isn't the only way to go, for sure, but this article is idiotic as far as making a point that community development is always the way to go. This is a simple parable that offers next-to-nothing as far as real world solutions except to say that, yes, we should make sure what we're building is useful. Which: No shit.
- raldi 14y ago
  > but this article is idiotic as far as making a point that community development is always the way to go. What part of the article suggests that?

ChuckMcM 14y ago

Parables are, by their nature, designed to make you think about how you think about something. I know it is a kind of circular argument but the key is that people sometimes can't think outside the way they think. A parable is a way of bridging (sorry) that gap. In this parable person A is engineering solutions, they are told to build a bridge so they build a bridge. Person B is solving problems, the people on one side of the gorge want to trade with people on the other. As part of the problem solution a bridge is built. If the parable works, it kicks your thinking out of its rut for a moment so that you can ask yourself if there is something you are building/doing for the sake of doing it rather than because it solves a larger need. If you are, then you should consider what happens when you are done and everyone realizes it isn't really "needed." You can be ok with that, or not. But the key was you took a moment to think about it. Parables hack your thinking process.

TeMPOraL 14y ago
> person A is engineering solutions, (...) person B is solving problems. This. You managed to highlight a difference that is often forgot. I used to think mostly like person A, but the longer I stay on HN, the more I feel I start to think like person B.

sxcurry 14y ago

Agree - this type of parable may be suitable for small children, but if you think about it, it has zero information content, and no applicability to the real world. I'd much rather read a real story about a real bridge or two - that's what I come to HN for.

raldi 14y ago
Real world version: Google Wave is bridge #1. Edit: The CueCat is an even better example! Meanwhile, the transition of Amazon from bookseller to everything-seller to hardware maker to cloud company is a good example of a real-world Bridge #2 story. Or the transition of Justin.tv into Twitch.
- yen223 14y ago
  The first iPhone is also bridge #1. An overly-designed gizmo that no one needed at the time. Hence its massive failure.
  - raldi 14y ago
    You're attacking a strawman. Nobody claimed Bridge 1 is always the wrong choice.
    - yen223 14y ago
      Sorry for the snark. I'm merely pointing out that the real world is a lot more nuanced than "Big design bad! Agile good!"
  - altrego99 14y ago
    The first iPhone was a bridge with a circus. Hence everybody went to see it, even though the toll was hefty. Some loved it so much, they even left their own village for good. In time a settlement grew around the circus. Now most people live around it. To see tigers and the zebras every morning became their way of life. No one lives in the old villages anymore, and who would - it doesn't even have a giraffe! Then came another bridge - little down the stream. This also had a circus, but with robots in it instead of animals. It became suddenly very popular for two things - 1) people are already used to living around a circus, and 2) the toll was way cheaper. Also robots were a novelty - who wants to see a giraffe when there are robots?

sesqu 14y ago

Reminds me of the best-selling parable of two mice and cheese, that I read before I had exposure to any real-world situations one might compare it with. I thought the story was moronic. The mice made stupid decisions based on available information, performed no secondary actions, and the suicidal one was the one we were supposed to emulate. Of course, I now understand a little better why people liked the story, but I'm glad I read it way back when I didn't.