Dyllen Owens — Writing

The Art of Debugging: A Journey Through the Unknown

Dyllen Owens — Sun, 15 Mar 2026 00:00:00 GMT

There's a particular kind of frustration that comes with staring at code that should work but doesn't. The tests fail. The console screams errors. And you, the developer, sit there wondering if you've chosen the right career.

But over time, I've learned to reframe debugging from a chore into an art form — a practice that, when approached with the right mindset, becomes one of the most satisfying parts of development.

Sample image — a wide landscape photo, shown at full column width.

The Shift in Perspective

Early in my career, bugs felt personal. Each one was evidence of my inadequacy, proof that I didn't belong in this field. The breakthrough came when I started viewing bugs not as failures, but as puzzles waiting to be solved.

This simple reframe changed everything.

Instead of asking "Why am I so stupid?" I began asking "What story is this bug trying to tell me?" The difference is subtle but transformative. One question leads to despair; the other leads to curiosity.

The Three-Phase Approach

After years of debugging everything from memory leaks to race conditions, I've developed a systematic approach:

1. Reproduce Reliably

Before anything else, you need to be able to trigger the bug consistently. This often takes longer than the actual fix, but it's non-negotiable. A bug you can't reproduce is a bug you can't truly fix.

2. Isolate Ruthlessly

Binary search isn't just for sorted arrays — it's for debugging too. Comment out half your code. Does the bug persist? If yes, the problem is in the remaining half. If no, it's in what you removed. Repeat until you've cornered the culprit.

3. Understand Before Fixing

This is where most developers go wrong. The temptation to immediately fix what looks broken is overwhelming. But resist it. Take time to understand why the bug exists. Often, the obvious fix only masks a deeper architectural issue.

The Tools That Help

Good debugging is tool-assisted, not tool-dependent. Here are my essentials:

Console.log, strategically placed — Yes, it's basic. It's also incredibly effective.
The browser's debugger — Step through code execution to see exactly what's happening.
Git bisect — When you don't know which commit introduced a bug, let Git find it for you.
Rubber duck debugging — Explaining the problem out loud often reveals the solution.

Sample image — a PNG screenshot, kept lossless.

A Recent Victory

Sample image (#right) — a portrait phone photo, rotated upright and stripped of its metadata at build time.

Last month, I spent three days hunting a bug that only appeared in production. Users reported intermittent failures, but our monitoring showed nothing unusual.

The breakthrough came when I stopped looking at the code and started looking at the infrastructure. The bug wasn't in our application — it was in how our load balancer handled sticky sessions during deployments.

The lesson? Sometimes the bug isn't where you're looking. Expand your investigation radius.

Embrace the Unknown

Sample image (#left) — the text wraps around it.

Debugging teaches humility. No matter how experienced you become, there will always be bugs that humble you, that force you to admit you don't understand something you thought you knew.

And that's okay. That's more than okay — it's the path to growth.

The next time you encounter a bug that makes you want to throw your laptop out the window, take a breath. Remember that every solved bug makes you a better developer. The frustration is temporary; the skill is permanent.

Happy debugging.

Why I Chose Simplicity Over Features

Dyllen Owens — Sat, 28 Feb 2026 00:00:00 GMT

We live in an era of feature bloat. Every app wants to be a platform. Every platform wants to be an ecosystem. And somewhere along the way, we forgot that software is supposed to solve problems — not create new ones.

Last year, I made a decision that felt radical at the time: I removed 60% of the features from an app I was building. Not deprecated. Not hidden behind a flag. Deleted.

Here's why it was the best decision I've ever made.

The Tyranny of "More"

When you're building a product, there's constant pressure to add. Users request features. Competitors launch new capabilities. Your own imagination generates endless possibilities.

But addition is easy. Subtraction requires courage.

Every feature you add has costs beyond the initial development:

Maintenance burden — More code means more things that can break
Cognitive load — More options mean more decisions for users
Testing complexity — More features mean exponentially more edge cases
Documentation debt — Everything needs to be explained

The Moment of Clarity

My turning point came during a user interview. I was showing off the latest version of my app, proud of all the bells and whistles. The user looked at the screen, clearly overwhelmed, and asked:

"Can it just do the one thing I need?"

That question haunted me. I had built an app that did many things adequately when what users wanted was an app that did one thing excellently.

The Pruning Process

Deciding what to remove was harder than building the features in the first place. I used three criteria:

1. Usage Data

If less than 10% of users touched a feature, it was a candidate for removal. Popular features stayed; niche features went.

2. Core Value Alignment

Every remaining feature had to directly support the app's core promise. If it was tangential — no matter how cool — it had to go.

3. User Feedback Quality

Features that generated confused support tickets were red flags. If users couldn't figure out how to use something, it wasn't serving them.

The Aftermath

After the great pruning, something magical happened:

User satisfaction increased — With fewer options, users felt less overwhelmed
Support tickets decreased — Simpler software means fewer questions
Development velocity improved — Less code to maintain meant more time for meaningful improvements
The core experience got better — With fewer distractions, I could focus on perfecting what mattered

The Philosophy of Enough

There's a Japanese concept called ma — the intentional use of negative space. In design, it's the empty space that gives meaning to what remains. In software, it's the features you choose not to build that define your product's identity.

Simplicity isn't about doing less for its own sake. It's about doing less so you can do what matters better.

Applying This to Your Work

If you're building something — whether it's software, a business, or a creative project — ask yourself:

What would remain if you removed half of what you've built?
Which features are serving your users versus serving your ego?
What would "enough" look like?

The answers might surprise you.

In Closing

Feature-richness is not a virtue. It's often a symptom of unclear thinking, a reluctance to make hard choices, or a fear of disappointing someone.

True sophistication lies in knowing what to leave out.

Build less. Build better. Build with intention.

Building in Public: The Uncomfortable Truth

Dyllen Owens — Sat, 10 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT

Six months ago, I started sharing my work publicly while it was still rough, incomplete, and frankly embarrassing. It's been the most uncomfortable and rewarding experience of my career.

If you're considering building in public, here's what no one tells you.

The First Post Is the Hardest

I remember hovering over the "Post" button, my cursor trembling slightly. The project wasn't ready. There were bugs. The design was rough. Who was I to share something so unfinished?

I posted anyway.

The response wasn't the ridicule I feared. It was encouragement, suggestions, and most surprisingly — people who related to the struggle. Turns out, everyone's work is messy in the middle.

What Building in Public Actually Looks Like

Let me dispel some myths. Building in public doesn't mean:

Sharing every line of code you write
Posting constant updates that nobody asked for
Pretending everything is going great when it isn't

It does mean:

Being honest about your process, including the failures
Sharing lessons learned in a way that helps others
Creating a record of your journey that others can learn from

The Benefits I Didn't Expect

Accountability Partners

When you announce you're working on something, there's subtle pressure to follow through. Not from anyone else — from yourself. You don't want to be the person who talks but never ships.

Unexpected Collaborations

Some of my best features came from conversations sparked by public posts. Users who saw early versions volunteered to beta test. Developers offered to contribute. Designers suggested improvements I never would have thought of.

A Living Portfolio

Every public post becomes part of my professional story. Future employers, clients, and collaborators can see not just what I've built, but how I think, how I handle setbacks, and how I grow.

The Uncomfortable Parts

I won't pretend it's all positive.

Criticism Hurts

Even when it's constructive, hearing that your work needs improvement stings. I've learned to sit with that discomfort, extract the useful feedback, and discard the rest.

Comparison Creeps In

Seeing others' public work can trigger imposter syndrome. Their progress seems faster. Their code seems cleaner. Their designs seem more polished.

Remind yourself: you're seeing their highlight reel while living your behind-the-scenes.

The Pressure to Perform

Once you have an audience, there's temptation to optimize for engagement rather than genuine progress. I've had to consciously resist this, staying true to what I'm actually working on rather than what might get more likes.

My Framework for Sharing

After months of experimentation, here's what works for me:

Share weekly, not daily. Give yourself time to make meaningful progress between updates.
Be specific about what you learned, not just what you did. "I refactored the auth system" is less valuable than "I refactored the auth system and discovered that session management is way more complex than I thought because..."
Include visuals when possible. Screenshots, diagrams, before/after comparisons — these make your updates more engaging and easier to understand.
Ask questions. Building in public isn't just broadcasting; it's starting conversations. End your updates with genuine questions.

Should You Do It?

Building in public isn't for everyone. Some people work best in solitude, and that's perfectly valid.

But if you're someone who:

Struggles with motivation when working alone
Wants to grow their network authentically
Learns by teaching and explaining
Is comfortable (or wants to become comfortable) with vulnerability

...then building in public might be exactly what you need.

The discomfort fades. The community grows. And looking back at your journey documented in real-time becomes invaluable.

Take the leap. Hit post. Let people see the mess.

That's where the magic happens.

Performance Optimization: Beyond the Basics

Dyllen Owens — Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 GMT

I spent three weeks obsessing over a 200ms improvement in page load time. I minified, compressed, lazy-loaded, and cached. The result? A marginal improvement that users didn't even notice.

Then I made one architectural change that cut load time by 3 seconds.

This is the story of what actually moves the needle in performance optimization.

The Micro-Optimization Trap

When most developers think about performance, they think about:

Reducing bundle size
Optimizing images
Adding caching headers
Using a CDN

These matter. But they're often the equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. If your architecture is fundamentally slow, no amount of micro-optimization will save you.

Finding the Real Bottleneck

The first step in meaningful optimization is measurement. Not guessing. Not assuming. Measuring.

I use this hierarchy:

1. Network Waterfall

Open your browser's Network tab and look at the waterfall. What's the longest bar? What's blocking rendering? Often, the answer surprises you.

2. Server Timing

If your pages are server-rendered, add server timing headers. Break down where time is spent: database queries, template rendering, external API calls.

3. Real User Monitoring

Lab performance and real performance are different. Implement RUM to see what your actual users experience on actual devices with actual network conditions.

The Architectural Shift

In my case, the bottleneck was clear: we were making 12 database queries per page load, with some queries taking 400ms each. No amount of frontend optimization would fix backend bloat.

The solution was architectural:

Query consolidation — Combine related queries into single, optimized queries
Data normalization — Restructure the database to support our access patterns
Caching layer — Introduce Redis for frequently-accessed, rarely-changing data
Edge computing — Move computation closer to users with edge functions

The result: page loads went from 4.5 seconds to under 1 second.

The Performance Budget

After that experience, I implemented a performance budget for all future work:

First Contentful Paint: Under 1.5 seconds
Time to Interactive: Under 3.5 seconds
Total Bundle Size: Under 200KB (gzipped)
API Response Time: Under 200ms (95th percentile)

These aren't aspirational goals. They're enforced in CI. Deployments fail if they violate the budget.

Optimization Techniques That Actually Work

Based on dozens of optimization projects, here are the techniques with the highest impact:

1. Reduce Round Trips

Every HTTP request has latency. Combine requests where possible. Use HTTP/2 multiplexing. Consider GraphQL to fetch exactly what you need in one request.

2. Move Work to Build Time

Anything you can compute at build time shouldn't happen at runtime. Static generation, pre-computed values, and build-time optimizations are essentially free performance.

3. Progressive Loading

Show something fast, then enhance. Skeleton screens, optimistic UI updates, and streaming HTML all create the perception of speed even when the full load takes time.

4. Eliminate, Don't Optimize

Before optimizing slow code, ask: does this code need to exist? The fastest code is code that never runs.

The Human Side

Performance isn't just a technical metric. It has real human impact:

Users on slow connections can actually use your app
Users with older devices aren't excluded
Users in emerging markets, where mobile data is expensive, aren't penalized

When you optimize for performance, you optimize for inclusion.

Your Next Steps

If you're working on performance, here's my suggested approach:

Measure first. Don't optimize blindly.
Look at architecture before looking at code.
Set a budget and enforce it automatically.
Test on real devices with real network conditions.
Remember the humans behind the metrics.

Performance is a feature. Treat it like one.