Featurism - the desire and perceived benefit of adding features - can spur growth and hype, but can also be a trap.
I have seen a game project where ...
Featurism - the desire and perceived benefit of adding features - can spur growth and hype, but can also be a trap.
I have seen a game project where devs (yes, including me) where so high on adding all the exciting ideas we conjured on or dev chat or when drinking beers, that we neglected stability, bugs and listening to users.
One way to identify featurism (at least in a game, where balancing the game is important) is to notice, it after adding a feature, you have to come up with ways for users not to abuse it. Very often, after adding anti-abuse provisions, the features stopped being used.
I learned to see that software can be like breaths of buddha, or whatever:
- the deconstructive inhale is as important as the fertile exhale
Pruning, nomem omen, the feature set can be healing.
Fellow bitcoiner said recently that #BIP110 castrates bitcoin.
Wording suggests it takes away vital functionality. But does it?
It reduces expressiveness of some featurisms. Splicing is not harmed by BIP110, large insertions are. Elastic multisigs still will be possible, protected by grandfathering. No harm there. And these are not vital. There are just nice to haves. Programmatic inheritance is a nice to have.
Truly vital functions of bitcoin are only reinforced and a proper way to defend featurisms is to curb the abuse, or remove completely.
With time, in the game dev, I learned to listen to the most active critics of what we, the devs, did. By tapping in to the player's thinking I was able to make the game better.
All this is to say, that if we were to drop some of the non-vitals, we'd have bitcoin be more like grep, and less like Windows 11 Notepad.
And I use grep with pleasure.