Actually Helvetica is an evolution of the 1896 typeface Akzidenz-Grotesk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akzidenz-Grotesk

But it wasn't designed by an evolutionary algorithm; it was designed by a genius typographer who trusted his own sense of taste.

I'm not sure where you think taste comes from besides evolution of ideas and data analysis done by black-box functions inside people's heads.

Formalizing that process and using externally-collected data is just de-black-boxing something that happens in a black-box form in the professional's mind.

Also, making decisions based on wishy-washy difficult-to-quantify human traits like "genius" and "sense of taste" seems unnecessarily risky, compared to making them based on measurements from repeatable tests.

I'm not advocating design by committee. I'm advocating justification with data. The designers should propose candidate designs. But the decision about which one to go with (or whether to redesign at all) should be supported by whether going with it furthers the business's goals.

You point out the need to pick the right measurement, and I agree, but it could be as simple as "What's the effect on conversion?" It has to be something! You can't just say "We're re-designing because I'm a HMI genius."

When a company is capable of replicating those black-box functions as an algorithm or business process, then it will be ready to launch the era of automated design.

Until then, the best known way to design something nice is to hire a talented designer and trust their instincts.

> The evolutionary, data-driven approach will never yield a Nest thermostat, iPhone, Helvetica, or flag of New Mexico

...for now, given today's technology, but I wouldn't bet on it long term. History is full of examples of things we once thought only humans could do.

But once many candidate designs are available to choose from, what better a way is there to unambiguously decide on the best besides testing and measuring?

As I said, the problem is writing the tests and knowing what to measure. How do you discern between a bunch of tests and measurements that are poorly-designed, and a bunch that are well-designed? You gather a bunch of people with good taste, and trust their gut.

But at that point, why not just cut out the middleman, forget the tests, and let the artists be artists?

See also: Footnote 3 of http://www.paulgraham.com/colleges.html#f3n