←back to thread

The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

(twitter.com)
837 points turrini | 7 comments | 13 May 25 10:31 UTC | HN request time: 0.956s | source | bottom
Show context
caseyy ◴[13 May 25 12:56 UTC] No.43972418[source]▶
There is an argument to be made that the market buys bug-filled, inefficient software about as well as it buys pristine software. And one of them is the cheapest software you could make.

It's similar to the "Market for Lemons" story. In short, the market sells as if all goods were high-quality but underhandedly reduces the quality to reduce marginal costs. The buyer cannot differentiate between high and low-quality goods before buying, so the demand for high and low-quality goods is artificially even. The cause is asymmetric information.

This is already true and will become increasingly more true for AI. The user cannot differentiate between sophisticated machine learning applications and a washing machine spin cycle calling itself AI. The AI label itself commands a price premium. The user overpays significantly for a washing machine[0].

It's fundamentally the same thing when a buyer overpays for crap software, thinking it's designed and written by technologists and experts. But IC1-3s write 99% of software, and the 1 QA guy in 99% of tech companies is the sole measure to improve quality beyond "meets acceptance criteria". Occasionally, a flock of interns will perform an "LGTM" incantation in hopes of improving the software, but even that is rarely done.

[0] https://www.lg.com/uk/lg-experience/inspiration/lg-ai-wash-e...

replies(27): >>43972654 #>>43972713 #>>43972732 #>>43973044 #>>43973105 #>>43973120 #>>43973128 #>>43973198 #>>43973257 #>>43973418 #>>43973432 #>>43973703 #>>43973853 #>>43974031 #>>43974052 #>>43974503 #>>43975121 #>>43975380 #>>43976615 #>>43976692 #>>43979081 #>>43980549 #>>43982939 #>>43984708 #>>43986570 #>>43995397 #>>43998494 #
1. hombre_fatal ◴[13 May 25 13:21 UTC] No.43972654[source]▶
Even if end-users had the data to reasonably tie-break on software quality and performance, as I scroll my list of open applications not a single one of them can be swapped out with another just because it were more performant.

For example: Docker, iterm2, WhatsApp, Notes.app, Postico, Cursor, Calibre.

I'm using all of these for specific reasons, not for reasons so trivial that I can just use the best-performing solution in each niche.

So it seems obviously true that it's more important that software exists to fill my needs in the first place than it pass some performance bar.

replies(2): >>43972973 #>>43972984 #
2. kasey_junk ◴[13 May 25 13:48 UTC] No.43972973[source]▶
I’m surprised in your list because it contains 3 apps that I’ve replaced specifically due to performance issues (docker, iterm and notes). I don’t consider myself particularly performance sensitive (at home) either. So it might be true that the world is even _less_ likely to pay for resource efficiency than we think.
replies(2): >>43973898 #>>43973973 #
3. jpalawaga ◴[13 May 25 13:49 UTC] No.43972984[source]▶
Except you’ve already swapped terminal for iterm, and orbstack already exists in part because docker left so much room for improvement, especially on the perf front.
replies(1): >>43973938 #
4. defen ◴[13 May 25 15:18 UTC] No.43973898[source]▶
What did you replace Docker with?
replies(1): >>43973928 #
5. kasey_junk ◴[13 May 25 15:21 UTC] No.43973928{3}[source]▶
Podman
6. hombre_fatal ◴[13 May 25 15:22 UTC] No.43973938[source]▶
I swapped Terminal for iTerm2 because I wanted specific features, not because of performance. iTerm2 is probably slower for all I care.

Another example is that I use oh-my-zsh which is adds weirdly long startup time to a shell session, but it lets me use plugins that add things like git status and kubectl context to my prompt instead of fiddling with that myself.

7. hombre_fatal ◴[13 May 25 15:25 UTC] No.43973973[source]▶
Podman might have some limited API compatibility, but it's a completely different tool. Just off the bat it's not compatible with Skaffold, apparently.

That an alternate tool might perform better is compatible with the claim that performance alone is never the only difference between software.

Podman might be faster than Docker, but since it's a different tool, migrating to it would involve figuring out any number of breakage in my toolchain that doesn't feel worth it to me since performance isn't the only thing that matters.