Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

as with many of these "haha tech nerds are rediscovering old things" comments, my instinctive response is:

yes, it is Good Actually that we are continually questioning and testing received wisdom. If we end up reinventing old things from first principles, that means we have all the more confidence in them, rather than relying on the unalive momentum of tradition and path dependence.

people who sneer at reinvention can be too smug sometimes. we owe all progress to the unreasonable men and women who are too arrogant to do anything but poke and prod at life on their own terms.




It's not the "question received wisdom", it's the utterly vapid and self-assuredness of their own damn smarts that is irritating.

Next up: "Should we bother wiping our asses? Hot startup DirtyButt claims to save you 30-45 seconds per day. 'If you think about it, going #2 is one of the grossest experiences people go through in their daily lives,' says Teyron Flanders, founder of DirtyButt. 'I bet I've spent more than several hours of my life putting my hands dangerously close to human waste. That's something I'd rather never do.' Now an A-list unicorn valued at more than seven hundred billion dollars, the startup offers no-wipe bootcamps, a double-thick underwear prototype, and organic options. 'What we're really giving people is freedom. Remember the run on toilet paper from pandemic times? We're going to relegate that dark chapter to the ash heap of history.'"

Stupid idea after stupid idea.


> What we're really giving people is freedom. Remember the run on toilet paper from pandemic times? We're going to relegate that dark chapter to the ash heap of history.

This is sounding more realistic than jucero!


At the risk of being accused of missing your point: you owe it to yourself to try a nice built in bidet. Many people who try it don’t want to go back to paper alone.

Or not. Your call.


Love my Toto Washlet and never going back! The fact that it heats the water really makes a difference over cheaper options!


Yeah I get the same vibes when people come with advice like "you don't need to use soap to wash yourself" oh no thank you


Except you really shouldn’t be wiping your ass. It’s a barbaric practice best left to emergencies or outdoor hiking or something. The use of a bidet is the only civilized way.


The part to sneer at is Meta's refusal to call it a cubicle, instead trying to brand it as an innovation. They could say "You know what, we were wrong, cubicles aren't so bad after all."


> yes, it is Good Actually that we are continually questioning and testing received wisdom.

Or you know, alternatively you could understand where the wisdom comes from instead of being clueless about it and think that one can make things better with a snap of fingers.


Sometimes. Other times (most times?) it seems like a kind of reactionary contrarian arrogance that people who have done/studied/experienced X surely have no idea what they are talking about and be dismissed by anyone who has experience with computers.


It’s only good if the “questioning received wisdom” actually involves questioning it. Not throwing it out and insisting that your idea is better, with zero evidence or even plausibility, for decades.


> we owe all progress to the unreasonable men and women who are too arrogant to do anything but poke and prod at life on their own terms.

You mean the men and women who insisted on open office for everyone but themselves ?


Specifically for this work,

More reconfigurable softer spaces is exciting to me. Cubicles are hard & fixed infrastructure. Having more dynamic use of space invigorates me, helps me escape a feeling of being trapped by routine.

The focus on sound absorbing material seems also extremely compelling. Sound dampening can have enormous impact & I can imagine some of these partitions doing a lot (ideally with the help of some more room treatment) to make the space pleasant.


It's also science. In which something becomes solidified only by "reinventing" it over and over and over.


Progress in science as I understand is only on the shoulders of giants (previous research), not starting over from first principles with every generation. If we did that we'd get nowhere, each generation would get to the wheel or so and then the next one would start over.

I don't think gp is talking about continuous refinement of ideas, which I get the sense is more what you meant. Spending time and energy reinventing cubicles again and again every 10 or so years seems best to avoid, in my opinion.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: