I'm convinced that a large reason for their apocalyptic warnings is because they're working to build moats for their businesses.
Get enough bills restricting AI passed through legislation, and they can cut off or slow down any newcomers that simply don't have the resources to compete with those that are already entrenched in the industry.
I started using the term “opinionated software” a little over 15 years when I was starting a new company. I built what I wanted as a participant and a fan of the sport.
Lots of other people had their opinions on it (“you’re doing it wrong and everyone wants it this way,” “you must have this feature” which barely anyone actually uses… the power users), but I held fast with my opinion (did usability testing to prove the it was easier to achieve the goals to back up my opinion) and I’m glad I did. It changed an industry for the better.
Excellent usability and functional design that achieves a goal better and easier will win people over.
I also built it with an API so that people can build their own versions of it with the same data, because others also have strong opinions, and I whole heartedly respect that. Some interesting things have come from it that are more targeted for specific users and situations. Pretty cool to see what others make.
While I don’t know how opinionated the guys that created Dark Sky were with it, I would guess that it’s a good example. It was different from all the other apps in their category in the way it surfaced information. Their new app is good (not quite as great as the original), but they’ve really spent a lot of time making a really usable and functional system.
Edit: About that same time in my life, I also realized that I no longer just wanted functional, I wanted both functional and form. I wanted well designed functional stuff. Turns out that people like that too.
If an idea of what the software is supposed to do conflicts with what the software does or intends to do, then the idea is wrong. What product people do (even good ones) is stretch the product to scratch every itch and address every user request, despite the software's opinion. That's Zawinski's Law. (See also the Antoine de Saint-Exupéry quote, "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Which unfortunately does not have a pithy name to my knowledge.)
The best thing a product team can do is learn to say no.
Thanks for sharing the video of moving the server.
I wouldn't say that I miss those days, but there's some good nostalgia there having done some things that feel pretty similar (early 2000s). Not quite to that extreme though.
For the project I've been working on for more than 15 years, we make extensive use of the pub/sub functionality for distributing live data. Pub/sub scales well across the cluster. Publish to one, and it goes out to subscribers on any of the nodes that they've connected to.
Will millions of users, high availability is critical for this functionality.
It reminds me of a rant that my friend sometimes goes on with regards to really low quality items, particularly about music...
someone wrote it, someone performed it, someone mixed it, someone approved it, someone developed marketing for it, someone helped get it on shelves, and then someone played it.
There were plenty of points along the way where the disaster could have been averted.
I don't understand the point of the rant. What disaster is having "bad music" out there? Is it stealing storage from "good music"? I understand this kind of rant for an iPhone, where a shitty decision brought along the chain of approval will impact million of people that are more or less stuck in the ecosystem. But music of all things? How do you even get in contact with "bad music"?
A lot of peple in this chain aren't paid to have a sense of ownership. They just do their job and their personal opinion of the work doesn't really matter.
Some of us care. Standing up and saying the product is crap leads to being asked to leave (fired). Or ends up on deaf ears, and the product is hated by people. Been in both situations, it doesn't seem there is a winning position.
I've been in the "someone performed it" and "someone mixed it" role for some tracks that I found utterly mediocre and yet ended up being some of the most successful stuff I've ever worked on. I mean, sure, previous works, marketing and hype can do a lot to alter the general perception, but most of the times it's just matter of being the right audience.
Missteps both in music and in other areas don't usually kill something that wasn't already moribund. The trashcan Mac Pro didn't kill Apple; Procol Harum's cover of Eight Days a Week didn't kill them or the Beatles.
The popping sounds from a turbo car is from the wastegate (whistling sound for a blow off value) when the system is releasing pressure from the turbo that was built up. It prevents over compression that would damage the engine.
I’m not talking about a dump valve, I’m talking about an ALS as I’ve mentioned. This is where the engine timing is delayed which results in some combustion to happen in the exhaust (hence literal pops). This is used to keep the turbo spooled by MAINTAINING pressure across the system. It’s a performance system.
If your dump valve is popping I think there’s something wrong!
I was thinking a similar thing. Many of our customers have purpose use computers that rarely see physical infrastructure internet, but need a modern browser (many chose Chrome on their own, we never recommended it).
They're going to get blasted with cellular data charges when they fire up their computer in the field.
Documenting why is incredibly important, but also why something has not been done.
The last business I started, I was coding at full steam building features that I could make work now although not optimal, so I would add comments reflecting that.
Over the > 15 years the product’s been on the market, there have been several times I’ve come back across those comments when we outgrew the quick solution several years later.
> They enjoyed each other's company and bonded over these shared experiences
My son competes on the national and international level in two different sports, so we do a lot of traveling. The bonding is very important, just as it is knowing when to get out of the way and let them shine.
In one sport, I drop him off and pick him up for practice (he gets distracted/flustered when someone is there watching him practice). In the other, I practice with him and am trying to stay better than him as long as I can.
There are a few other things I think are important...
If they don't want to do something, don't push them to. My son decided not to compete in a national ranking event in a couple of months because his competitions are on Thursday and Saturday and he would miss three days of school when factoring in travel.
Try to anticipate their eventual needs and make sure the right tools/equipment/etc. are available for them before they realize they needed it. Also, have backup equipment just in case something breaks or fails.
Make sure that they understand the 'why' behind all the things that both they have done, and what you have done, to enable them to get to that level.
Finally, from a young age, teach them to "always do your best, and always do better next time." The first national competition he went to, he literally finished dead last out of over 250. When we were in the airport heading home, I let him know that it's alright if he doesn't want to do more of them. He didn't back down in the slightest, and asked me when the next one was because he knew he could do better. Next month will be the second time he competes in the Junior Olympics for that sport.
Get enough bills restricting AI passed through legislation, and they can cut off or slow down any newcomers that simply don't have the resources to compete with those that are already entrenched in the industry.
reply