Yeah, after a period of general stability where power was more even distributed among different groups of people (pols, media, finance, labor, edu, etc), we've found ourselves at the mercy of this dangerous new concoction of naive software engineers and business sociopaths that has escaped the lab and run amok over the world. Sociopaths always find a way to harness the ignorant but powerful, and this time its the software engineers.
Part of the role of college education is to expose students to the broader world and help them become informed members of society, raising unanswered/unanswerable questions, getting young people to think and grow and find their place to contribute in the great experiment of civilization. Cramming for exams is def part of the college experience but so is/should be these listen to the wisdom of your elders kinds of talks, even if some are kooky or you don't agree w aspects of them.
Discourse around college education has shifted a lot in the last 20 years toward a kind of optimization for job readiness, which itself is both a reflection of economic conditions and a misunderstanding of what elements are necessary for civilization to persist and thrive. College is supposed to be full of messy ideas among a menu of disciplines to challenge us and help us find our passions, and it's supposed to prepare us to become members of a society where all of these ideas and disciplines co-exist. In other words, college is under-optimized for the individual because its purpose is to optimize for society as a whole.
The kind of bigger picture discussion that this lecture is doing is especially important in engineering disciplines since they don't focus much on humanities and the stuff they get isn't tailored to their approach and mindset. We might live in a different world if a little more 'why' had been introduced into the 'what' and 'how' of eng education.
Does Apple spend R&D on iPhone screens like they do Apple Silicon? What's that got to do with what we're talking about regarding iPhone's core IP (Apple's own chip, the most important IP from Apple)?
In the Aqua image the big bright blue scrollbars stand out far, far more than the content. That sucks, honestly. So does the percentage of the screen dedicated to their presence.
Also, horizontal scrollbars suck. One thing later versions of Finder did well was adjust columns to minimize the presence of them.
We just don't need UI that big anymore. These days our cursors are much more accurate, from the magical Mac trackpad to high DPI optical mice, and we're 40+ years into GUIs so the limited number of people who opt-in to a full computing experience can already be expected to know the basics.
Yes Tahoe sucks, but going back to Aqua or classic MacOS would also suck, just in a different direction. If you actually spend time using classic MacOS and Aqua these days, man is it frustrating to get basic things done. Everything is so slow and you're constantly resizing windows to see whats in them. I own several Macs from the 80s-00s and they are really in need of many quality of life updates that later MacOS revs added. On a modern Mac, enabling 'show scrollbars' gets you to a pretty optimal Finder experience, minus all the stupid Mac bugs and Tahoe nonsense like this article points out.
Hard disagree with all of this. I feel like I am constantly lamenting the simplicity and usability of old scrollbars and cursing their will o the wisp modern implementations.
Scrollbars used to be invisible to me. They only bubbled up to my consciousness when I needed them, and then there was no friction in their use. Now I am having to think about them constantly. To me that is 'standing out'.
Very much agree. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug. Not saying GP's opinion was pure nostalgia, but a lot of people certainly selectively remember only the good parts as they complain about the now.
I actually don't think there's anything wrong with horizontal scrollbars, as long as you're using an input device (like an Apple trackpad) that makes it equally easy to scroll either axis.
safest place is put it opposite of drivers side, because if you're out of gas on the side of the road and filling it up, you won't be standing right next to freeway traffic. Saab started this.
"... many European cars have the fuel door located on the passenger side, while many Japanese and American vehicles have the fuel door on the driver side. Both techniques have valid reasons. European automakers place the fuel filler on the passenger side for the sake of safety when a vehicle has run out of fuel and has pulled off onto the shoulder of the road to fill up from a canister. Meanwhile, American OEMs tend to place the fuel door on the driver side of the vehicle for convenience reasons, so that a driver doesn't have to walk around the vehicle when filling up at a gas station."[0]
Brings to mind the Dead Kennedys album name, "Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death"
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could [run macOS on a phone], they didn't stop to think if they should." - Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park
I've never found a term I liked for this particular concept at the intersection of education & business so I made one up a while back:
A Knowledge Pool is the reservoir of shared knowledge that a group of people have about a particular subject, tool, method, etc. In product strategy, knowledge pools represent another kind of moat, and a form of leverage that can be used to grow or maintain market share.
Usage: Resources are better spent on other things besides draining the knowledge pool with yet another new interface to learn and spending time and money filling it up again with retraining.
The term is Institutional knowledge. "An organization's collective memory, encompassing the unique expertise, experiences, processes, and cultural insights built over time by its members, acting as a vital asset that guides operations, decision-making, and continuity, often residing in seasoned employees' tacit understanding but also in documented procedures and data. It includes deep technical skills..."
Institutional knowledge is scoped to members of an organization and covers things related specifically to the institution's operations. What I'm talking about is the knowledge of the general population, often as it relates to an institution's products.
For instance, tons of people know how to use Adobe products like Photoshop, by way of deliberate inaction on the part of Adobe around product piracy outside of workplaces. With this large knowledge pool entering into the workforce, users were able to convince workplaces to adopt Adobe products that they were already familiar with.
That wouldn't be institutional knowledge, but a pool of knowledge that institutions could take actions (or inaction, as the case above) to influence.
I don't think the medium of short form video is redeemable. Its occasional positives are the delivery vehicle for the many negatives, the sugar coating around the poison. It's rotten by just about any measure: properties of the medium, what types of business it attracts, messages that thrive, how well it reflects reality, aggregate effects on people across a variety of outcomes, the aftertaste of using it, etc.
I think the best question to assess it is does this make us better people or not, and to what degree? From what I have seen, the answer is it seems to be pretty significantly de-skilling us in attention, agency, nuance, psychological wellbeing, etc. It makes us more vulnerable to influence and manipulation. The businesses that benefit the most from deploying it are advertising-based, which naturally leads to surveillance and algorithms and pace of consumption that maximizes addiction. The messages that perform best are emotional and attention seeking. There is no information quality control. The consumption pattern it suggests leaves no room for thinking, processing emotion, or nuance.
The personal crusade I'm on is to build a competing product at the quality level of TikTok/Insta that diverts interest & attention toward books, which as a medium is both a lot more of a known quantity and whose consumption naturally results in longer attention spans, greater literacy, and all the nth order consequences of written culture. It's great that things like BookTok exist but ultimately that energy & activity needs to find its way over to a healthier home.
I agree that is is irredeemable. I'm excited for Oracle to take over because then TikTok will degrade to a point where I'm not compelled to use it anymore!
> build a competing product at the quality level of TikTok/Insta that diverts interest & attention toward books, which as a medium is both a lot more of a known quantity and whose consumption naturally results in longer attention spans, greater literacy, and all the nth order consequences of written culture
This sounds great in theory and has been tried a few times (see: Goodreads, Storygraph, Worm.so and a few others) but without the social aspect I think it is difficult to gain traction. A lot of my favorite books I've found by going to local bookstores and looking at the employee recommendations.
Haha yes hopefully Oracle works its anti-magic on TikTok, that'd be lovely to see.
Agree social & network effects are essential to achieving the mission. We (Margins) are building that part out now after spending the last year and a half perfecting the single player experience, it's very early but so far it's going great and we went viral again this holiday season. Social also needs something different than the 'let's make an early 2010s social product' approaches I keep seeing people trying, that stuff just cannot work in the age of AI bots poisoning the commons.
I don't think any of the existing players are close to the quality levels of TikTok/Insta, certainly not GR or SG, and there's always new copy/paste projects that come and go, its kinda become a genre of solo dev project like weather apps. I also think all these Goodreads-like apps are following the wrong formula to win the mainstream, they tend to get stuck appealing to niche user interests. Of all of them Fable made the best attempt at it but wasn't ever original enough in formula or high enough in quality, and they burned through $27m largely failing to find PMF and sold for peanuts.
Local bookstores are necessary/essential parts of winning back attention from social media and offer the unique value of physical presence and community, but will never be sufficient to get all the people addicted to these digital drugs away from their apps. Apps really are powerful things that offer unique experiences that people have come to expect, so I think a realistic theory of change involves an app being the medium to route attention to healthier ends. How exactly to do that is indeed the challenge!
reply