Jonathan Blow

Also the fact that people, as we see in this thread, defend the ever-breaking systems as something natural is a sign of how decadent we are. This is obviously the natural outcome of profit being the only driving factor for production. And it's not exclusive to software industry.

Except, no. Because if these systems worked better and cost less to build and run, everyone would make more profit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINPACK  It has been largely superseded by LAPACK, which runs more efficiently on modern architectures. Nothing is sacred, lol. It's so dumb

Yeah, I was gonna say LAPACK but opted for the older one.

Because when a code base is developed over many years by many different people to address changing needs with a set of changing dependencies, inconsistencies will occur and shortcuts will have to be taken and things that used to work no longer will. Not everything can be LINPACK

It's really easy to talk about some Platonic Ideal codebase, but in real life you have teams to manage and priorities to be balanced and the work you do will not be perfect.

I have always been fascinated by the fact people think it's OK to have broken software. It may be damn difficult to ship software or games with true 0% of bugs. But the truth is we routinely get tons of shitty stupid bugs everywhere even on low complexity closed embedded systems.

Part of the problem is that nowadays people accept as "normal" having to constantly update. I have shipped a lot of games on ROM chips. As of today I only know about one serious bug on one of those games. Come on. At least the basics should be working OK.

Jon I don't think you have any idea how open source software works.