✨PROJECT : Mario Kart 3.js ✨
🔴ANNOUNCING !🔴
Hey dear three.js, WebGL and React three Fiber community, Thanks a lot for your support through the project ! it's big and it's coming through !
Today I announce ! the project is going Open Source !... See more
I don’t like living alone.
This insight brought to you by my brother, who is visiting me and currently laying on my living room floor laughing at something at his phone. I feel warm and calm and deeply okay.
The matrix differentiates between the cost of making the switch from the likelihood that you'll have (or want) to make the switch. Things that have a low likelihood and a low cost shouldn't bother you much while the opposite end, the ones with high switching cost and a high chance of switch, are no good and should be addressed. On the other diagonal, you are taking your chances on those options that will cost you, but are unlikely to occur - that's where you'll want to buy some insurance, for example by limiting the scope of change or by padding your maintenance budget. You could also accept the risk - how often would you really need to migrate off Oracle onto DB2, or vice versa? Lastly, if switches are likely but cheap, you achieved agility - you embrace change and designed your system for low cost of executing it. Oddly, this quadrant often gets less attention than the top left despite many small changes adding up quickly. That's our poor decision making at work: the unlikely drama gets more attention because what if!