Craft software that makes people feel something

Mouse trail effect & emotional UX

• Many commenters focused on the homepage’s mouse “snake” effect, describing it as delightful, satisfying, or distracting to the point of overshadowing the article.
• Some loved it; others hated it, especially those who habitually move the mouse while reading.
• There was brief technical curiosity about how it keeps constant memory usage.
• The effect was later reported as disabled on article pages while remaining on the homepage.

What feelings should software evoke?

• Several note that lots of software already makes people feel something: often dread, rage, or frustration (e.g., enterprise tools, DRM, Atlassian/Microsoft products).
• Others say admiration often comes from “cold” functional excellence, not sentimentality or overt attempts at emotional manipulation.
• One commenter argues that aiming for “wow” is misguided; software’s main purpose is helping people get jobs done, with “wow” as a side-effect.

Building for yourself vs building for others

• Strong appreciation for the idea of making tools that “exist to delight me, and that’s enough,” resisting pressure to turn every project into a SaaS or mass product.
• Multiple people relate stories of private or niche tools they built primarily for personal joy or workflow.
• Several compare this to artists creating for themselves first; sometimes others care later, sometimes never.

Open source, GitHub, and boundaries

• Some want to share source without taking on community obligations: no issues, PRs, or support.
• GitHub is criticized for not letting maintainers fully disable collaboration features; workarounds include stern READMEs or automation to close issues/PRs.
• Debate over whether most projects will get any attention at all; experiences differ.

AI and “handcrafted” software

• One view: ordinary users won’t care if code is human- or AI-written as long as it works, so “handcrafted” may lose its niche.
• Others counter with analogies (home-cooked meals, mechanical watches) and argue that craft and taste still matter.
• Several argue current AI cannot reliably produce complex, high-quality software, especially beyond simple web apps.
• Some see AI as freeing time from boilerplate so humans can focus more on the “crafted” parts and emotional quality.

Inspiration, repetition, and “wow”

• The article’s claim that repetitive programming reduces odds of “wow” is contested.
• Some insist professionals should not wait for inspiration; they just work, and user value comes first.
• Others argue that when software solves previously “impossible” pains, genuine “wow” is almost inevitable, even if not explicitly targeted.

Ethics of eliciting emotion

• A few note that big platforms already “craft” strong emotions—anger, hate, depression—with serious societal downsides.
• One commenter argues deliberately making people feel things through software can be irresponsible, given social media’s harms.

Exploration and play in computing

• There is nostalgia and support for experimental, deeply personal environments (custom editors, Emacs setups, niche tools).
• A Knuth quote is invoked to argue for letting many computer scientists freely explore; concern that current industry optimization and risk aversion are slowing real progress.