> You don’t need all the status quo bias of null hypothesis testing.

You don't have to make the status quo be the null hypothesis. If you make a change, you probably already think that your change is better or at least neutral, so make that the null. If you get a strong signal that your change is actually worse, rejecting the null, revert the change.

Not "only keep changes that are clearly good" but "don't keep changes that are clearly bad."

This is a reasonable approach, particularly when you’re looking at moving towards a bigger redesign that might not pay off right away. I’ve seen it called “non-inferiority test,” if you’re curious.