> IMO if one has to work this hard to sell/explain a tech there's 2 possibilities 1/ there is no real need of tech 2/ it's a flawed abstraction

There’s of course a third option: the solution justifies the complexity. Some problems are hard to solve, and the solutions require new intuition.

It’s easy to say that, but it’s also easy to say it should be easier to understand.

I’m waiting to see how this plays out.

Change for change sake is bad, yes. And the problem is, that these last changes have been half-baked, most things WITHIN GOOGLE still haven't fully done the switch to Material You / Material 3 Base, and now they decide to throw stuff around yet again.

It's hardly a design system if a random lead UI/UX designer redesigns core elements every 3 years

From the article

> This is not the dinosaur killer. This is not the planet killer. This is at most dangerous for a city

These days, vendor lock-in hardly feels like a worthwhile consideration when evaluating frameworks. A near complete rewrite feels inevitable when transitioning from, say, React to Svelte.

> most smart people know what the term “cargo cult” means from Feynman

Unsure which group you’re in after making this generalization

Not smart people but probably mostly software and computer people in general (but if you equate software and computer people with smart people then the statement is true).

Apparently, Fundamental of Data Engineering book does refer to cargo-cult metaphor inside its content [1].

[1] Fundamentals of Data Engineering:

https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/fundamentals-of-data/97...

Sorry AI, not taking the bait today.

That’s fine. Not everyone needs to “get it”. Some like it. Some don’t. Cool.

It's always the people who like something that have a persecution complex when someone says their thing sucks. Maybe look inward for your answers.

I mean didn’t you just describe every performing artist ever?

OMG this. Why do people get so upset because someone else likes something that they don’t? It’s OK to like different things.

>Why do people get so upset

Probably because of the extraordinary reception mentioned in the article and the claim that's being made? This is apparently the highest rating Pitchfork has handed out in half a decade and it's supposed to be an indicator of a major shift in the music industry.

That's quite a lot and after having listened to it I have to agree with the original poster, I don't really get it either. I expected the next Bowie after those reviews.

Sadly, pitchfork has recently been gutted. Wouldn't be surprised if the new masters are doing this purely for PR...

Giving this album 9.1 is the most old-Pitchfork thing they've done in years. It's the anti-PR move to do.

Pitchfork was already past its prime in recent years, but seeing it gutted by Conde Naste is a bummer.

Have you found a good alternative?

Since when does calling a piece of music or artist mediocre indicate 'upset'?

It seems perfectly normal for a large portion of passing readers to simply not care that much either way.

That’s fair. GP doesn’t really seem that upset, they just don’t like the record.

When I wrote this I was coming off another comment where the commenter seemed genuinely upset over the distribution medium. I think a little bit of my sentiment about that post dribbled through.

Even so, I wish people were more live-and-let-live about very subjective things like music. It’s a big world and art is not zero-sum.

The _very_ first paragraph quotes a Muslim saying "It’s the destruction of our religion.”.

Are there any privacy safe companies out there that provides similar services? I’m interested in the ancestry and health aspects of 23andMe, but I obviously don’t trust the company.