AI-driven "Design"? An Article by Jorge Arango jarango.com Like a programming language interpreter, GPT-3 translates the designer’s intent from a language they’re already familiar with (English) to one they need to learn (Figma’s information architecture, as manifested in its UI.) This can be easier for a new/busy designer, much like Python is easier and faster to work with than assembly language. But that’s not “designing” — at least not any more than compiling Python code is “programming.” In both cases, all the system does is translate human intent into a lower level of abstraction. Sure, the process saves time — but the key is getting the intent part right. I’ll be convinced the system is “designing” when it can produce a meaningful output to a directive like “change the product page’s layout to increase conversions.” aidesignintentabstraction
Two types of work An Article by Jorge Arango jarango.com There are two types of work: growth work and maintenance work. Growth work involves making new things. It can be something big or small. In either case, growth work often follows a loose process. Maintenance work is different. Maintenance work involves caring for the resources and instruments that make growth work possible. This includes tools, but also body and mind. Maintenance is ultimately in service to growth. But effective growth can’t happen without maintenance. As with so many things, the ideal is a healthy balance — and it doesn’t come without struggle. organizationinformationmakingwork
Internal design teams and thought leadership An Article by Jorge Arango jarango.com The design industry is an ecosystem. External design teams provide critical functions beyond augmenting internal design resources. Thought leadership — pushing the field’s boundaries — is indeed one of them. Many practices and tools we take for granted — journey maps, personas, conceptual frameworks — were pioneered and/or popularized by ‘outies.’ Most of the field’s foundational books and blogs are by people outside ‘client’ organizations. This isn’t because internal designers aren’t as clever or dedicated as their external colleagues. (Many ‘innies’ are former ‘outies.’) It’s because internal design roles are structurally misaligned with public thought leadership. designux
Not Just a New Feature; a New Compact A Fragment by Jorge Arango jarango.com My sense is that Slack’s teams think of themselves as adding ‘features’ to a ‘product,’ instead of as stewards of a place where people work. featuresplace
The small web is beautiful An Essay by Ben Hoyt benhoyt.com I believe that small websites are compelling aesthetically, but are also important to help us resist selling our souls to large tech companies. In this essay I present a vision for the “small web” as well as the small software and architectures that power it. Why aim small?Features and complexitySolving the problem of software bloatRaw size isn't enough Rediscovering the Small Web wwwmicrosites
Why aim small? Why aim small in this era of fast computers with plenty of RAM? A number of reasons, but the ones that are most important to me are: Fewer moving parts. It’s easier to create more robust systems and to fix things when they do go wrong. Small software is faster. Fewer bits to download and clog your computer’s memory. Reduced power consumption. This is important on a “save the planet” scale, but also on the very local scale of increasing the battery life of your phone and laptop. The light, frugal aesthetic. That’s personal, I know, but as you’ll see, I’m not alone. performancesystemsconservation
Features and complexity Niklaus Wirth of Pascal fame wrote a famous paper in 1995 called A Plea for Lean Software. His take is that “a primary cause for the complexity is that software vendors uncritically adopt almost any feature that users want”, and “when a system’s power is measured by the number of its features, quantity becomes more important than quality”. A Plea for Lean SoftwareSpeed is a featureRequirements proliferation featurescomplexity
Solving the problem of software bloat But instead of just complaining, how do we actually solve this problem? Concretely, I think we need to start doing the following: Care about size: this sounds obvious, but things only change when people think they’re important. Measure: both your executable’s size, and your program’s memory usage. You may want to measure over time, and make it a blocking issue if the measurements grow more than x% in a release. Or you could hold a memory-reduction sprint every so often. Language: choose a language that has a chance. Remove: cut down your feature set. Aim for a small number of high-quality features. My car can’t fly or float, and that’s okay – it drives well. Say no to new features: unless they really fit your philosophy, or add more than they cost over the lifetime of your project. Dependencies: understand the size and complexity of each dependency you pull in. Use only built-in libraries if you can.
Raw size isn't enough A few months ago there was a sequence of posts to Hacker News about various “clubs” you could post your small website on: the 1MB Club, 512KB Club, 250KB Club, and even the 10KB Club. I think those are a fun indicator of renewed interested in minimalism, but I will say that raw size isn’t enough – a 2KB site with no real content isn’t much good, and a page with 512KB of very slow JavaScript is worse than a snappy site with 4MB of well-chosen images. ...[Instead, it's about] an “ethos of small”. It’s caring about the users of your site: that your pages download fast, are easy to read, have interesting content, and don’t load scads of JavaScript for Google or Facebook’s trackers. minimalismcontentsize