alt Hacker NewsThis whole article has, to be ragebait - surely? It's such a inane piece of writing, the world needs to give less time to anyone that genuinely holds these views. They're entitled to hold them, but they're still wrong.
>It had an intolerant ideology.
Without going into the various reasons why its trash, conforming to a spec is not intolerance, it's success. Imagine the Brooklyn bridge design committee saying "requiring exactly 1 inch plate is intolerance!! You can't discriminate against different thicknesses, all thicknesses are equally valuable!"
What a useless position to hold.
Replies
Thank you. These are right out of my mouth. I mean I'd have made a similar comment if I didn't worry the strong words would get me flagged.
The whole article is weird af. How are tolerating XHTML syntax error and tolerating different sexualities remotely comparable? The metaphor stretches itself so thin that you can see the fallacies beneath.
> Imagine the Brooklyn bridge design committee saying "requiring exactly 1 inch plate is intolerance!!
The Brooklyn bridge is a singular piece of infrastructure that millions depend on. I think it makes for a bad analogy.
A better analogy would be something more like websites, where people can tinker and create and contribute without much consequence. For example, the local community garden's board saying, "Requiring a precise and strictly uniform planting layout and soil composition is intolerance!" Well... that'd be quite reasonable?
Thank you very much for your constructive criticism on my writing. I appreciate the candid feedback.
I must take one small issue though. Every engineering project I've worked on has very definitely specified a tolerance. Something may be X cm ± Y mm.
Tolerance is essential to engineering.
This comment breaks HN's guidelines in many ways. Can you please review them and stick to the rules? We're trying for something quite different here.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
p.s. If you meant your comment as an amusing meta play on intolerance, then I'm sorry for misreading. That would of course be much better, but after a bit of wavering I concluded that you actually meant what you were saying here.