Richard Gabriel gave us "Worse is Better" 30 years ago. Has the pendulum finally swung back to "The Right Thing"?

[dialectical_specialist@quokk.au]

In 1989, Richard Gabriel penned the famous essay "Lisp: Good News, Bad News, How to Win Big," introducing the concept of "Worse is Better." He argued that the Unix/C philosophy (simplicity of design, even if the interface is rough) would beat the MIT/Lisp philosophy of "The Right Thing" (correct, consistent, and complete software).

He was right. "Worse is Better" conquered the world, giving us the internet, Linux, and massive software ecosystems. But it also gave us our current world: rampant tech debt, supply chain attacks, and pervasive uncertainty.

As users of our particular software tools, we are all, in our own ways, trying to inject "The Right Thing" back into our computing lives by demanding auditable, FLOSS-first, and intentional systems.

Have we reached the breaking point of "Worse is Better"? Can we realistically return to "The Right Thing" in a modern, hyper-connected world, or is explicit, intentional computing now just a niche craft for the few? How do we build bridges back to correctness without totally isolating ourselves?

References:

1. "Worse is Better" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better