grimpy

this is spam. not in a derogatory way, but in a literal way.

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.

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.

This works until your leadership changes.

There are two kinds of Unisom: diphenhydramine and doxylamine succinate.

this should be flagged; this is ai slop.

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"

why does this page have the same look as ssi.inc? feels kind of strange to copy that of all things?

This just means this with lots of capital can buy things for cheap. This is not a downside. Overall, they win.

this is a useless semantic position.

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.

> There's so many questions I genuinely don't have an answer for...

> Has Congress made it illegal to use an off-brand messaging app for secure communications? _Why_ is it insecure? What is the probability that China is reading these messages in real-time? 100%? 25%? 0.2%?

Is your point that, in the space of your own lack of knowledge, that reasonable rational may exist? Could you share what gives you trust in this administration to be so generous?

This is a nice collection.

If you are making software, I implore you to do a quick and simple test if you plan on using icons: show them to some users and ask if they would know what they mean. There is a significant chance the icons are meaningless. Yes, context helps, yes, merely communicating difference helps, but, for the most part, nobody knows what any of these things mean.

...and especially since this is a convention the author uses for all their articles. The AI images make the whole site look fake.

...and not just decades of art theory, but any familiarity with the actual art objects themselves.

Looking at the author's other (prolific) posts, I can't help but wonder if this is AI spam.

Yeah, I get that this aesthetic is how a lot of people consume media these days, but the aesthetics combined with the subject matter is repulsive.

The tone of this article is asinine considering that no one forces anyone to specialize in a particular framework, specializing/investing in any technology is always a risk, and the point that fundamentals are good is non-controversial.

I guess this is directed at people who take cargo cult blog spam seriously? or people who are debating what to learn? If its the latter, the entire post could be rewritten in a positive way that explains the value of learning the fundamentals. That would've been more productive than whatever this is.