That submission illustrates a common, bizzare thinking pattern seen with programmers. "Everything else sucks" so they adopt solution X. Then other programmers start to criticise solution X. "Monoculture", "fanboyism" or whatever the lingo. Meanwhile everyone forgets about why "everything else sucks". Other programmers will even try to counter the allegation that everything else sucks, as if it were not true.
"Everything else sucks" is why I "settle" for volunteer-supported, free, UNIX-like OS. It is why I "settle" for using djb's software (the stuff IETF would never approve of, not just the crypto work). It does not mean I think that these solutions are ideal in any objective sense. It means "everything else sucks". And when these solutions help me avoid the pain of having to use "everything else", then it stands to reason they will appear not only better than everything else but even high quality in an objective sense. (To use Gutmann's analogy, the oasis looks refreshing, regardless of the actual water quality.)
Another example are the discussions on the k language/intepreter on HN. Commenters would focus on crticisms of k instead of considering why other solutions cannot achieve the same performance. As one person put it, the question should not be "Why is this so concise and fast?" but "Why is everything else so bloated and slow?" (paraphrasing)
"Everything else sucks" is why I "settle" for volunteer-supported, free, UNIX-like OS. It is why I "settle" for using djb's software (the stuff IETF would never approve of, not just the crypto work). It does not mean I think that these solutions are ideal in any objective sense. It means "everything else sucks". And when these solutions help me avoid the pain of having to use "everything else", then it stands to reason they will appear not only better than everything else but even high quality in an objective sense. (To use Gutmann's analogy, the oasis looks refreshing, regardless of the actual water quality.)
Another example are the discussions on the k language/intepreter on HN. Commenters would focus on crticisms of k instead of considering why other solutions cannot achieve the same performance. As one person put it, the question should not be "Why is this so concise and fast?" but "Why is everything else so bloated and slow?" (paraphrasing)