@fishidwardrobe@social.tchncs.de
Post #1952992
2026-04-27 02:36 UTC
@RyeNCode @mattly in a lot of ways this quote is even worse. "purpose" is motive, intent. that's not the same thing as what a system ends up doing. might as well say that system designers never make a mistake.
that said, i'm here to endorse what i believe was meant: that good intentions behind a bad system are worth nothing. "the purpose of a system isn't what it does, but it might as well be"
Replies (1)
-
@RyeNCode@mstdn.ca 2026-04-27 02:54
@fishidwardrobe @mattly The understanding I have is that original intentions mean nothing in the case of systems. What matters is what it does. That allowing such a system to continue is by definition allowing and authorizing that what the system does is it's purpose. If that wasn't the case, action would have been taken to correct it or kill it. Thus for any system that persists, to the entities that influence it's continued existence: what the system does must be desired by those entities. Otherwise they would have changed, removed or replaced that system. Maybe I'm missing it, or muddying the waters. Maybe it's to late on a Sunday.