All I'm saying is that literal perfection is an asymptote. It's well and fine (great, even) to try and move towards it, but a person will be both happier and more productive once they accept that it's ultimately unreachable.

I don't know anything about the author; maybe he was being hyperbolic when he used the word "perfect" (though it didn't sound like it). I was just taking the opportunity to point out a lesson that I've learned.

I think "perfection" is understood to be a limit or non-unique. But where we are with tooling today, industry wide, is so completely abysmal that I don't think the behavior of shooting for absolute perfection or something in reach is that different.

Words like yours implies we are "good enough" and anything better is "too costly", and I don't think that is remotely true.

That was not my intent.

Glad to be wrong, then.

what did you think he meant by referring to "Pareto principle"? did you not know and just decide to not look it up?