Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better
I quite agree with this first reading, as I am a person who is greatly affected by the aesthetics of my surroundings. Norman wrote that there doesn’t have to be a scientific, cognitive explanation in place for us to like something better (as with the example of the color computer displays — there is no information advantage, yet we cannot go back to black & white displays). This brought two pieces of supporting evidence to mind. The first is YouTuber Molly Burke, who is blind and also very into fashion and makeup. I have watched her videos for a long time, and something that she often says is that, just because she can’t see the makeup or the colors of her cute outfit doesn’t mean she can’t enjoy it. This is a twist on what Norman wrote about the teapots: just because he can’t use them every day for brewing tea efficiently, doesn’t mean that they don’t give “satisfaction in their appearance”. While I agree with most of this text, I do think the author is biased, as a designer, when he says that “to be truly beautiful, wondrous, and pleasurable, the product has to fulfill a useful function, work well, and be usable and understandable”. I think true beauty can exist without usability, and might sometimes even exist because of the lack of usability.
Her Code Got Humans on the Moon—And Invented Software Itself
This reading was a fascinating glance into the beginnings of software, and I was both surprised and not surprised at how the tech industry hasn’t changed in terms of gender inequality. In fact, it may have even been less discriminatory back then, because it was the “Wild West” and nobody knew what they were doing. It is notable how Hamilton’s role as a mother and Lauren’s playing with the keyboard led to saving the Apollo 11 mission, because it shows how diverse life experiences in the workplace enhance overall outcomes.
Additionally, I think the inherently exclusionary “inside club” feel of programming persists to this day, because of the learning curve needed to understand and participate in discussions in the community. It’s comparable to jazz music, in the sense that there is a certain level of “work” you need to do to be a part of the culture.
I think this article shows that everything that we take for granted today was conceived and invented by people for the first time, some time ago. For example, I, with no previous knowledge about physical computing, am now able to use breadboards to create circuits that take digital input, but back in Hamilton’s time, a whole team of expert seamstresses was required to wire the 0s and 1s. This raises the question of how current technologies that are inaccessible to laypeople may, in the very near future, be simplified and commercialized enough for anyone to manipulate.