February 1, 2026
When fail tales fail
Real engineering failures instead of success stories
FailHub drops “real fails” — commenters cry vague vibes and “AI slop”
TLDR: FailHub wants to teach through real tech flops—like sneaky scope creep and fuzzy “done”—but commenters split between “great idea” and “too vague,” with some alleging AI-written fluff. The crowd’s verdict: the mission is solid, but trust needs concrete details, not generic lessons, to actually help teams avoid repeat mistakes.
FailHub launched with a bold promise: real engineering failures, not shiny success stories. Their first drops—scope quietly ballooning and teams saying “done” without agreeing what “done” means—sound relatable. But the community didn’t just nod; they pounced. The loudest chorus? “Be specific or be ignored.”
One camp is cautiously hyped. Users like jmward01 say a fail-focused site could map “anti‑patterns” (translation: common mistakes) so others can dodge them. Another camp is roasting the vagueness. Animats longs for the old Game Developer postmortems and even Flying magazine’s “I learned about flying from that” columns—because those were concrete, not “TED Talk fog.”
Then came the plot twist: “AI slop” accusations. Commenter tedchs claims the writing smells like chatbot prose, even citing a too-perfect line about fake “growth.” Others just want receipts—names, numbers, screenshots, timelines. Meanwhile, practitioners like Neywiny bring it back to earth with a facepalm: teammates declaring work “done” when, uh, half wasn’t—precisely the second failure’s point.
Amid the drama, someone even dropped a side quest: more failure content via this stream. Bottom line: the internet doesn’t hate FailHub’s mission—it hates being handed blurry lessons. If you’re going to teach from failure, show your scars, not a vibe.
Key Points
- •FailHub publishes weekly collections of three real engineering failures and invites community submissions.
- •Failure #1 describes silent scope growth where small changes accumulate without explicit acknowledgment or pushback.
- •Clear boundaries, goals, and open dialogue are recommended to manage scope changes and maintain focus.
- •Failure #2 highlights misalignment due to an undefined, measurable Definition of Done among stakeholders.
- •Frequent demos, breaking work into small pieces, and early feedback are recommended to avoid rework and delays.