Design is a human skill that, for now, even Google can’t automate. Why is that so?
It’s because design addresses both rational and irrational needs that we all have. The rational part is difficult, but doable; it’s the irrational, human part that is hard. The rational part can be engineered and prepared to perfection; the irrational part needs to be engineered with the same kind of precision, but must also be timely and relevant to how the consumer feels.
john maeda at KPCB
All Posts in Uncategorized
into a world of quantum microscopes.
the titanic, 1978.
$42/user is not all that crazy. ($19B/450M)
this seems like a huge win for everyone struggling against the pressure to move quickly to revenue through ads, user tracking/selling analytics, etc.
build it clean, make it fast, make it cheap, let it scale, and sell it within 5 years.
A good reputation takes years to build, but just one bad experience can destroy it. So when balancing between tactical easily measurable goals like more clicks, and long term goals like trustworthiness, it’s essential to listen carefully to your instincts.
instinct vs data, via the google ventures library.
because journalism was created and sustained far more by market conditions than by public policy, news organizations always have the option of surviving by becoming purely commercial and dropping the high-minded parts of journalism, which grew and thrived only because they were subsidized by other material.
(via)
Your body being made out of countless stars of the past.
Proof of an omniscient supreme being.
Making a coil that produces unlimited free energy.
A number grid that shows the underpinning geometry of the universe.
How everything is a torus.
(off the deep end)
"I think right now Netflix does have a competitive advantage over HBO because of the analytics," Adgate said.
Networks like HBO still rely, on large part, on Nielsen data. But the information Netflix gets is much more textured, granular... and valuable.
paul rand was a force. in my eyes: one of the few modernists who really lived what they spoke - who found a way to get to the truth of the issue. not only did he produce phenomenal work, but he spoke about his principles with conviction and insight. his words (and humour) are still as relevant today, even though our technologies and processes have fundamentally evolved - attesting to his connecting more with human behaviour and psychology than with any tropes of design. anyone working on crafting a 'culture of design', creating 'experiences' or 'connecting with your users' has much to learn here.
the strategic pyramid.
via.
But despite fractal art there is no easy way to transform your knowledge about fractals into money.
The project of self-evolution demands an understanding of humanity’s relationship with tools, which is mysterious and defining. Some scientists, like the archaeologist Timothy Taylor, believe that our biological evolution was shaped by the tools our ancestors chose eons ago. Anecdotally, when people describe what matters to them, second only to human relationships is usually the mastery of some demanding tool. Playing the guitar, fishing, golfing, rock-climbing, sculpting, and painting all demand mastery of stubborn tools that often fail to do what we want. Perhaps the key to these and other demanding technologies is that they constantly require new learning. The brain is stimulated and forced to change. Conversely, when things are too easy, as a species we may become like unchallenged schoolchildren, sullen and perpetually dissatisfied.
the problem with easy technology, the new yorker.
get to the point.
john caples.
an ode to shower beer.
The second, he added, “is leadership — in particular emergent leadership as opposed to traditional leadership. Traditional leadership is, were you president of the chess club? Were you vice president of sales? How quickly did you get there? We don’t care. What we care about is, when faced with a problem and you’re a member of a team, do you, at the appropriate time, step in and lead. And just as critically, do you step back and stop leading, do you let someone else? Because what’s critical to be an effective leader in this environment is you have to be willing to relinquish power.”
What else? Humility and ownership. “It’s feeling the sense of responsibility, the sense of ownership, to step in,” he said, to try to solve any problem — and the humility to step back and embrace the better ideas of others. “Your end goal,” explained Bock, “is what can we do together to problem-solve. I’ve contributed my piece, and then I step back.”
in defense of the first, from the baltimore sun
julie zhuo on how to get a designer.
There are three elements to great product design: value, ease of use and craftsmanship. How these elements are defined may differ depending on the audience for whom you’re designing and the problem you’re looking to solve. But at a high level, these three elements are universally necessary and desired.
margaret stewart: understand who you design for.
the other times modern, via fonts in use.
time to kill agile, by pragdave.
squashed type, jumping left to right alignments, and - to push it beyond redemption - making the Y die into the N. this new logo makes me physically uncomfortable. why, pentagram?
Enjoy the whimsical incongruity of buying over-priced semi-precious necklaces while clonking around these faux-authentic haunted coffins of heavy industry. The containers' use in sites like the Heygate is part of neoliberalism's cunning fetishisation of the ruin.
vice tries hard.
dig through the hyperbole and the 'florid purple prose' and there's a good point, here.
The reason for saying we need to do ‘an exceptional, near-perfect job of execution’ is this: When you want something really bad, you will put up with a lot of flaws. But if you do not yet know you want something, your tolerance will be much lower. That’s why it is especially important for us to build a beautiful, elegant and considerate piece of software. Every bit of grace, refinement, and thoughtfulness on our part will pull people along. Every petty irritation will stop them and give the impression that it is not worth it.
slack pre-release internal team memo.
trading clothes is always a hit.
qozop.
paul rand on the use of black.
The British economist Roger Bootle has written about the difference between “creative” and “distributive” work. Creative work, Bootle says, is work that brings something new into the world that adds to the total available to everyone (a doctor treating patients, an artist making sculptures). Distributive work, on the other hand, only carries the possibility of beating out competitors and winning a bigger share of a fixed-size market. Bootle explains that although many jobs in modern society consist of distributive work, there is something intrinsically happier about a society that skews in favor of the creative.
“There are some people who may derive active delight from the knowledge that their working life is devoted to making sure that someone else loses, but most people do not function that way,” he writes. “They like to have a sense of worth, and that sense usually comes from the belief that they are contributing to society.”
a subtle message to fox's creationist viewer base (boss of the cosmos).
