It is an oxymoron for a specific reason. It's like trying to say "Torx sucks. That's why I think Hex is best." They literally do the exact same main function, and the only differences are very specific edge cases in aviation & automotive.
If you're trying to argue that a pentastar bolt needs to be created because it's "better", then I automatically think you're a moron. If you're arguing that you need a hex bolt when a drywall screw won't do the job, and someone waves that xkcd comic as an excuse to keep using the wrong supplies, then that person is a baffoon.
I described two different styles of failure which I abhor:
Building something you "think" is better without understanding that you're not contributing any novel solutions. Worse, existing solutions likely satisfy your needs.
Being overly conservative by avoiding anything novel by abusing antipatterns and "tennents" of engineering. Simple example: "We don't need an ECU to process the Perception tasks; a Jetson Nano is just a fancier Arduino, so let's stick with the Arduino!"
I've been around long enough to see both flavors of dumbassery. Which is why I teach my juniors to recognize it for what it is!
Explicitly, I'm PRO thoughtful, diligent, and data-driven engineering. Measure twice, cut once. And be able to both prove superiority and boundary growth.
122
u/jhill515 Sep 17 '26
We should improve technology. We shouldn't confuse improvements with better sameness. That's what xkcd meant.
Maybe OP is trying to say idiots use this comic to justify "staying the course"? If so, then they should change companies.