Jun 18

Critical Code Mass

By Stefano Buliani General Babbling No Comments »

This Critical Code Mass (Hereafter CCM) is, as you can probably imagine, the amount of code a software can be composed of before falling into the vicious circle of bug-fixing-to-introduce-new-ones.
Keep the development going after the CCM is reached leads inevitably to self destruction.

This is particularly true for startups, the CCM is something all technology entrepreneurs-to-be should be wary of. It is indeed a difficult balance to strike. The question is: When do I release?

In my opinion the best thing to do is: Complete a stage one of the development. Which consists of the basic software with the main features implemented but without all the garments and the good looks of a final version. Release this version one and wait for feedback from your users.
Careful, I didn’t say that it can be buggy. In fact, it has to be bug-less. Users can cope with missing portions in a software but not with bugs.

As it happens, users also like to be involved in the development process. They’ll indicate you new features and improvements consequently reducing the amount of work on your shoulders and also the responsibility of devising new features.

A line of conduct that more and more companies seems to be embracing. Microsoft for example has loosened its policies on employees’ blogs thus creating a constant flow of fresh information/feedback from their user-base.

As I said the Critical Code Mass window is easy to miss.
And if you do miss it your software is going to become a self sustaining over-engineering-powered train in route of collision with the budget train which is clearly running in the opposite direction.
If your company enters this downward spiral you better have the money to back the development otherwise you’re history.

What a company needs, specially a startup, is the filter, the midfield player. Someone who sits between the two opposite figures of the engineer and the entrepreneur.
The engineer who believes that by “engineering around” can bring order in the universe and the entrepreneur who usually wants everything immediately and free of charge are seldom compatible. This man’s role is to keep the development on track, on a sensible track, and prevent the entrepreneur’s sudden changes of mind from jeopardizing the future of the application.

If this middle man is wise enough to know how to handle an engineer in an engineering frenzy and an hopeful entrepreneur entrepreneuring (who is often more dangerous than the engineer) your software is going to have a future. Maybe not bright but at least a future in which it exists.
This is, of course, if the initial idea is also rational.

Jun 08

Regulations on their way…

By Stefano Buliani WWW No Comments »

…for online dating.

There seems to have been some problems lately with this strange and ever so widely diffused activity. So the Washington Post was reporting not two days ago.

The big players in the market have been facing a constantly growing number of lawsuits from disgruntled “Users”.

Match.com and Yahoo Personals have always been immune thanks to the Congress’ Communications Decency Act of 1996, which says providers can’t be held liable for the lies of third parties.

Recently these companies started creating mock-up profiles to generate interest and trust, or so they say. Be that as it may, I wonder how can they talk about trust in such a “market”.

Those of you who have tried the slightly-more-realistic (hence more difficult… it’s a bit like driving simulators for PC: The more realistic the tougher) version of dating and maybe also courageous pick ups in clubs probably know the kind of rubbish we talk at each other during the “courting dance”. Can you see my problem? Trust – rendezvous. An oxymoron. Nasty little buggers oxymorons.

Someone decided that this cheating at the users expenses had to be brought to a stop, the conclusion was simple. Create regulations for this rather specialized branch of the world wide web.
I won’t talk about specific regulations that have been put forward because frankly I’m neither knowledgeable nor particularly interested in the matter.

So, moving on to my next doubt. How can you “use” online dating?
I’m aware that this question might cause some turmoil, but I really can’t see one single good reason. Unless of course you’re some sort of disgustoid in human form and consequently don’t want to be seen by your partner, not even on a very low quality web-cam.
As far as I’m concerned the utmost quantity of technology that can be involved in the dating activity is:

  1. Email. If the person you’re picking up is reluctant in giving away his/her phone number.
  2. The mobile phone if you’re lucky enough to enjoy a fresh contact number consisting of a correct number of digits and an existing prefix.

I’m a bit old fashioned. Or sane, as I prefer to put it.

The only not-so-regular form of dating I can put up with is speed dating. A surprisingly interesting way of humiliating yourself as much as possible in front of a complete stranger (in the smallest amount of time conceivable). I don’t know who invented it but I’m almost positive it was a man who had nothing sensible to do with his sadistic deviances.
Standing for a predefined amount of time in front of a stranger who usually communicates just by emitting sounds which are meant to signify a level of disappointment.
However, in the case of speed dating, you know exactly what you’re up against therefore if you wanna get kicked inna fork is entirely your decision.

After the not-so-small digression the last question is: how are new regulations going to help?

We are barely smart enough to save ourself from our own stupidity, even though most of the times we fail in doing so. But how do you pretend to save people from their own hormones? It’s unheard of!

preload preload preload