Blaise is trying so hard to be a engineer-philosopher but none of his work here is useful. I'm very confused as to why he gets so much attention here, it's very clear he's in dialogue with no one.
It's just a really fascinating topic in general and in a well known publication so the article gives us a good excuse to discuss it despite it's flaws.
Maybe the flaws make it more engaging because it's less intimidating.
Laggy experience (Safari, M3 air) talking about laggy experiences. I suspect the needlessly ornate demo controls (scaling, opacity, animation) contributing this -- playing with them has animation jank. Probably something up with the typography too. Bizarre choice considering the subject matter. Scrolling is also not great.
> In a same way, I think often delight is absence of delight. In places and apps that welcome fast fingers, delight can be abstaining from a transition or something cute but deathly. Pushing for delight of the right kind can mean long fights with frameworks to reduce even one-frame delays,
Highlighting this quote happened at very low fps. This is just a document. Confusing.
They're both first generation antihistamines and work as agonists on the H1 receptor, causing sedation. There's no reason to choose one over the other for a first time user, but they can cause rapid tolerance. So, I'm guessing the only reason they offer both is if you'd become tolerant to one of them and can no longer fall asleep on it.
im quite of aware of what it is. this isn't just "make a brutalist website" it is "make a website that looks like ssi when meta has multiple platforms and means to publish the same message." it is much more intentional than "lets make it look like web 1"
could you frame innovation problems as "design" problems? sure.
was the cotton gin framed as a "design" problem in the sense that it had some sort of epistemological lineage to the "design" discipline when it was invented? I suspect not.
the worst thing design ever did for itself was frame itself as "the" human-centered problem solving discpline. everyone is a human-centered problem-solver in the most general sense, in the same way that everything is a "design" problem in the most general sense.
I think it's inevitable (and fine) that aesthetic trends influence UIs, however, what is terrible (and already happening... again) is that people will create all kinds of faulty reasoning and justification as to why the new trend is empirically better UX when what likely is at play is a tiny bit of innovation and a lot of novelty.
IME, there could be a lot more clarity in product and UX if more people were honest with themselves and others about just wanting "better" looking UI.
Before I left Google, my org's leadership (recent external hires in the pursuit of ruthless efficiency) instituted a "5 minutes between meetings" rule. The intent was to shorten meetings and have time between them.
Well, no one agreed upon which 5 minutes were to be shortened, and like the post, it often wasn't observed anyways. So the result was 10 minutes of confusion every half hour.
