But perhaps that's too ambitious to suggest taking on for either camp. And maybe it doesn't matter insofar as the real lessons of Worse is Better is that both first mover advantage on a quicker and popular solution outpaces the ability to deliver a more correct and robust position, and entrenches the less ideal system. It can be really challenging for a system that is in place to change itself from its present position, which is a bit depressing.

Busy week coding -- but there was one delightful article that led me down a small rabbit hole of Richard P Gabriel's writing about "worse is better" from 1989/90. The hub for this idea is here: Richard P. Gabriel: "Worse Is Better", https://www.dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html And I found it via: Christine Lemmer-Webber: "How decentralized is Bluesky really?", 2024-11-22, https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/ The idea of "worse is better" got connected to Gall's Law, and loosely relates to why idealistic, big software rewrites fail so often. And why things that are imperfect but provide value proliferate.

I would really argue there hasn't been a better time to make music and there hasn't been a better time to consume and listen to music

is there a way to say what that means about the actual world you're operating in uh when you're dealing with companies 00:35:01 or governments or Davos and these fancy one% Summits or as you alluded to conspiracies earlier as you know the Illuminati qinon typ they believe that there's that seven of you guys in a room and you they're deciding it for everyone 00:35:14 else uh uh for the internet also I think that I think that's wishful thinking they hope that there is somebody in charge truth is much worse it's chaos the truth is chaos

People know it’s bad but not how bad. This gap in understanding remains wide enough for denialists and minimisers to legitimise inadequate action under the camouflage of empty eco-jargon and false optimism. This gap allows nations, corporations and individuals to remain distracted by short-term crises, which, however serious, pale into insignificance compared with the unprecedented threat of climate change.

The game is lame and the main gimmick of writing stuff is being shat on with the horrendous gameplay. If you have a very unique formula, don't try to change it.

Too new to comment on the specific answer

This is a new version of the game and it's actually worse than the one I used to play as a child. Puzzles have been removed, pathfinding is buggier than I remember it to be and you can't aqcuire a specific item at the beginning of the game. It's definitely not worth buying, even for nostalgia's sake.

I was almost immediately deflated. This is a cut-down reskin of a 3 year old game from the same company.

I would love to ask devs what the ****. It used to be a not bad puzzler with crappy movement, but it had to be at least a bit interesting if my Steam counter shows 5 hours. Now it is a crap.There is nothing left from the previous version - except the fact that the main character is a robot. Earlier the game looked like a bad retro, and now it looks like sweet flood. The robot moves extremely slowly now and, what's worse, it seems that it has the same levels as a game that used to be called "Abrix for kids".Achievements were reset and the new ones are broken, so it is enough to make a step to achieve 1000 steps, move a block one to get a 1000 moved blocks achievement and same with destroying blocks. I think it is even better this way. No one has to play it more than few minutes.It is sad what happened with Abrix. Avoid it.

And we shave off 6 or so seconds, that is huge.

Since the common problem with concatenating JavaScript files is the lack of semicolons, automatically adding one (that, like Sam said, will then be removed by the minifier if it's unnecessary) seems on the surface to be a perfectly fine speed optimization.

sprockets 4 makes Chrome browser identification of SCSS css lines _worse_

If I can't do something to change the sprockets 4 debugging experience I am seeing, I am going to probably downgrade back to sprockets 3. I am finding it impossible to develop CSS the ways I am used to.

You can write the query in this good old way to avoid error

Also there is always an option to use SQL: @items .joins(:orders) .where("orders.user_id = ? OR items.available = true", current_user.id)

but if .or() throws an error then I'm back to the bad old days of using to_sql

Systemd problems might not have mattered that much, except that GNOME has a similar attitude; they only care for a small subset of the Linux desktop users, and they have historically abandoned some ways of interacting the Desktop in the interest of supporting touchscreen devices and to try to attract less technically sophisticated users. If you don't fall in the demographic of what GNOME supports, you're sadly out of luck.

The benefits for developers do reflect on benefits for users, with more software delivered faster and more securely.

What’s the use of ie. snap libreoffice if it can’t access documents on a samba server in my workplace ? Should I really re-organize years of storage and work in my office for being able to use snap ? A too high price to pay, for the moment.

I - we all - totally agree about the benefits of snap for developers. But the loss of comfort and flexibility for end user is eventually a no-go option.

I clearly understand why snap is a safety progress on server and IoT but in my « human » usage snap is just restricting how I use my data and computer.

remaining: 0, callbacks: [] r: 0, // remaining outros c: [], // callbacks p: outros // parent group

Svelte will not offer a generic way to support style customizing via contextual class overrides (as we'd do it in plain HTML). Instead we'll invent something new that is entirely different. If a child component is provided and does not anticipate some contextual usage scenario (style wise) you'd need to copy it or hack around that via :global hacks.

The problem with working around the current limitations of Svelte style (:global, svelte:head, external styles or various wild card selectors) is that the API is uglier, bigger, harder to explain AND it loses one of the best features of Svelte IMO - contextual style encapsulation. I can understand that CSS classes are a bit uncontrollable, but this type of blocking will just push developers to work around it and create worse solutions.

Even without going to that extreme, the constraint of having a single <style> can easily force component authors to resort to the kinds of classes-as-namespaces hacks that scoped styles are supposed to obviate.

This is it. I'm done with Page Translator, but you don't have to be. Fork the repo. Distribute the code yourself. This is now a cat-and-mouse game with Mozilla. Users will have to jump from one extension to another until language translation is a standard feature or the extension policy changes.

Mozilla will never publicly ask users to circumvent their own blocklist. But it's their actions that are forcing people to do so.

So to me, it seems like they want to keep their users safer by... making them use Google Chrome or... exposing themselves to even greater danger by disabling the whole blocklist.

Employment-based insurance does not help solve thisproblem; it exacerbates it.

But what seems like the perfect solution, fining the parents for their bully-child, may actually make the problem worse.

That slumberd, wakes the bitter memorie Of what he was, what is, and what must be [ 25 ]

In my professional career I’ve noticed that doing “The Right Thing” is not always the best path. That phenomenon is called The Rise of “Worse is Better” and it can be observed in many things including C, Unix, Windows, JavaScript… Seems like New Jersey approach wins out more than it looses in a real world. (Be a virus, spread and than the pressure will rise to better the game).