bigstrat2003 an hour ago

> Who cares if it's good enough? Send the product, if people use it, it's good enough. If not, let users debut it and give "feedback", problem solved.

I care, because doing a sloppy job and seeing if people will tolerate it is not acceptable engineering practice. It's not engineering at all. More pragmatically, if you do the thing you are suggesting, you won't have users for much longer. They will abandon you and go to someone who actually makes good products.

▲

augment_me an hour ago | parent [-]

I don't believe this in practice. I am at a FAANG-like firm, and we are just maxxing the engagement and people use the product more and more the more we serve stuff to keep them hooked using their data and behaviour.

The quality of what we provide seems to matter 0, we are up about 40% issues in prod year-to-year but the users and their engagement is also growing.

I think there is a small subset of technical nerd/idealists who think that quality is all that matters but they are in their own little sandbox while 97% of users are in another one.

	▲	willtemperley 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> I think there is a small subset of technical nerd/idealists who think that quality is all that matters This is just a derogatory comment. It is exactly this kind of arrogance is killing open source. In my area, GIS, there are foundational projects that are necessarily intricate. For example it might be necessary to make a four-dimensonal transform of a location, that takes into account point movement due to the Glacial Isostatic Adjustment. There are hundreds of other complex examples I could come up with. This is deep knowledge. The libraries are intricate and quality does matter. Unfortunately the lynchpin maintainer has just gone on indefinite strike, partly because open-source vibe-coders are wholesale copying and relicensing some of these libraries in their quest to ... do what? I actually I don't know what they want. Take all the oxygen from the room as far as I can tell.