"People trying to improve things should be encouraged; even if they always fail"
No, people trying to improve things should be presented with (sane) "barriers to entry".
While there is no "right" way to improve things, there are tons of certified wrong, dead-end, been-here-done-that ways that should be avoided. Engineering is nothing if we don't learn from our collective mistakes, our history, and from proven theory. Else, you get the equivalent of those countless kooks who claim to have invented "cold fusion", "perpetual motion machines" but the "establishment doesn't believe them".
People trying to improve things is not by itself beneficial. Even if we restrict this to programming, we have fragmentation of effort, and you get like 200 frameworks for the same thing with marginal differentiation. If someone comes along with some radical idea, more power to them.
But we reserve the right to mock those coming up with YET ANOTHER tired cliche of a concept and/or implementation. They don't get free applause just for effort.
No, people trying to improve things should be presented with (sane) "barriers to entry".
While there is no "right" way to improve things, there are tons of certified wrong, dead-end, been-here-done-that ways that should be avoided. Engineering is nothing if we don't learn from our collective mistakes, our history, and from proven theory. Else, you get the equivalent of those countless kooks who claim to have invented "cold fusion", "perpetual motion machines" but the "establishment doesn't believe them".
People trying to improve things is not by itself beneficial. Even if we restrict this to programming, we have fragmentation of effort, and you get like 200 frameworks for the same thing with marginal differentiation. If someone comes along with some radical idea, more power to them.
But we reserve the right to mock those coming up with YET ANOTHER tired cliche of a concept and/or implementation. They don't get free applause just for effort.