Disappointed Optimists
adrianhoward
64 points
8 comments
September 08, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 61.7ms across 5,917 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- I Remain a Skeptic lproven · 101 pts · August 15, 2026 · 49% similar
- The Education of a Doomer f311a · 58 pts · September 07, 2026 · 48% similar
- Preparing for a Post-Trump Internet HotGarbage · 15 pts · September 03, 2026 · 44% similar
- Why aren't smart people happier? (2022) rafaelc · 137 pts · August 20, 2026 · 44% similar
- AI Doomsday Bullshit Is Getting Tired cdrnsf · 30 pts · July 29, 2026 · 44% similar
Discussion Highlights (3 comments)
0trip
i am sorry but this gave me a pessimist vibe...what was the message here exactly?
JSR_FDED
Clear-eyed description of the reality of corporate life. Designers feel this pain, as does anyone (like sw devs) who has a sense of “I could make this better” but isn’t given the support to do it.
n4r9
> A cursed problem, in his definition, is an unsolvable design problem rooted in a conflict between two promises that can’t coexist. You made both promises, on purpose, and they contradict each other, and no amount of clever tuning gets you out. You can only cut through it and give something up. > His example is a free-for-all fighting game. You promised players a test of combat skill, and you promised them a game worth winning. But the way you win a free-for-all is politics — alliances, betrayal, ganging up on the best player — so the two promises eat each other. You can’t fix it with a patch. You can only decide which promise to sacrifice. Is anyone else confused about this? I'm not sure exactly how these promises contradict. Is the idea that politics makes a game less "worth winning"?