this repo has no description
📚 Update Programming and Systems documents with new insights on scaling and system purpose
+4
-1
+1
Programming.md
+1
Programming.md
···
14
14
- Eliminate state. If you can't, make it visible.
15
15
- Design is an iterative process. The necessary number of iterations is one more than the number you have currently done. This is true at any point in time.
16
16
- Complexity is the single major difficulty in the successful development of large-scale software systems.
17
+
- [You don't need to scale right away](https://thmsmlr.com/cheap-infra). Servers are getting more capable faster than the internet is growing.
17
18
- Compounding complexity must be fought at every turn. [Alternate between phases of expansion (new features) and consolidation](https://qntm.org/devphilo).
18
19
- Write code that's easy to delete.
19
20
- If you can't easily explain why something is difficult, then it's incidental complexity, which is probably worth addressing.
+3
-1
Systems.md
+3
-1
Systems.md
···
43
43
11. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system — its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters — arises.
44
44
12. The power to transcend paradigms.
45
45
46
-
**Don't aim for an ideal system. Build a set of [[processes]] and protocols that evolve to fit the environment over time.** [Complex systems fail](https://how.complexsystems.fail/). [The purpose of a system is what it does](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does).
46
+
**Don't aim for an ideal system. Build a set of [[processes]] and protocols that evolve to fit the environment over time.** [Complex systems fail](https://how.complexsystems.fail/).
47
+
48
+
[The purpose of a system is what it does](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does). However, [this view can be misleading](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/come-on-obviously-the-purpose-of). A system's purpose is often its intended goal, even if it fails or has unintended consequences (e.g., a hospital intends to cure all patients, even if it doesn't succeed; bus emissions are side effects, not the purpose). Attributing failure or negative side effects as the *intended* purpose often ignores complexity, conflicting goals, or simple failure. A [common interpretation](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/highlights-from-the-comments-on-posiwid) is that if a system consistently fails its stated purpose but isn't changed, its *actual* (perhaps hidden) purpose might be succeeding. Understanding the *intended* purpose, even if the system fails, is often useful for predicting its behavior (e.g., predicting an intelligence agency's actions based on its goal to prevent attacks, even if it fails). The phrase can obscure the useful distinction between a primary goal and unavoidable (or accepted) side effects.
47
49
48
50
If everyone agrees the current system doesn't work well, who perpetuates it? Some [systems with systemic/incentives failures are broken in multiple places so that no one actor can make them better](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/), even though, in principle, some [magically coordinated action could move to a new stable state](https://equilibriabook.com/molochs-toolbox/).
49
51