Too bad there is only one "fun fact." Irene ran all of Yahoo design then all of google design and now is at Khosla helping entrepreneurs. Um... AND teaches Yoga.
Who was CEO fo the influential Adaptive Path in their early years? Founded LUXR, the first Lean UX agency way before the book was written about Lean UX?
Brenda is a real OG for games and UX. Her wikipedia article can tell the tale en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_La… but I admire Purple Moon and her books, Design Research and Computers as Theater probably the most. She's a personal hero!
Rashmi has done so much great work! Don't blame her for what happened to slideshare; when she was founder/CEO it was amazing!
OMG, the work she is doing there is amazing! and dig up her talks...
ok, gonna usability test twitter alternatives to see if i can coax authors and illustrators over...
Mastodon: D (would be F but there a ton of people here who want to do free tech support) Librem.one: F
who's next?
fyi, authors and illustrators are tech savvy, they just have better things to do.
hmm, reddit might be the answer, except it doesn't cross the streams, I adore my heterogenous stream,
"We're entering a new type of design" Overtta Sampson, talking NOW on AI and ML hci.st/547zoom
As ever, it will be up on this site and our YouTube Channel in about 2 weeks hci.stanford.edu/courses/cs547/…
Our speaker.
As a former Journalist, I kept waiting when I moved into design for us to say, this is our ethics statement. But it never came, so I had to make my own. We all should.
A mistake a lot of us in tech make is thinking everyone is like us. Twitter makes this worse because we follow people like us. I'm going to call them "Product people" like we did at LinkedIn in the old days. It includes designers and engineers.
We are people who like new things.
Product People are never satisfied. We believe something could always be better.
We don't like being told what to do, but we enjoy being challenged.
We don't mind ambiguity, because it is a space of opportunity.
And it's hard to imagine any other way to be.
When I was a new design manager at Yahoo (gosh, in 2002?) we had to do "interesting" work like figuring out what a search interface should be and "boring" work like making banners.
I decided to rotate designers from role to role so they could have fun sometimes and rest sometimes
I am against aspirational and committed OKRs. tl;dr on why: the limits of working memory and tessler's law.
What do I recommend instead: consider if you want a moonshot goal or a yoga stretch.
If you have never done yoga, a good teacher will invite you to stretch but NOT hurt yourself. So as you set a goal you can start with what you know you can do but then slowly increase it until you feel the stretch. When you say off this is a bit hard, but not impossible.
I heard stories of a company where they stopped using OKRs because the team would kill themselves each quarter to make the OKRs. Because they couldn't self-regulate I'd suggest they use yoga stretches instead. Here the manager would coach them down from their moonshot goal.
Via the suggests, I've gotten a lot of clarity on the problem:
My students are asked to make interactive fiction (IF.) They are computer science students (HCI) and while they are all great at nonfiction, many struggle with fiction (never mind the complexity of interactive.)
Some have never even written fiction! I cannot imagine this TBH.
I notice they have a lot of freedom creating "disposable" stories such as RPGs and other story telling games.
But when they make their own story, the often start strong and then get stuck. This is to be expected: