3 ms·
Very nice article. I always struggled with design, not because I didn’t know how to, but the feeling of uneasiness that comes up when we don’t have the details
by abc_lisper 6y ago
Very nice article. I always struggled with design, not because I didn’t know how to, but the feeling of uneasiness that comes up when we don’t have the details or imagination to see the repercussions of our designs. I’m stuck as a senior engineer, even though I have designed and implemented systems, because I think the veneer of design knowledge when talking to others is pretty thin, and as someone who reasons by causality and simulation, it’s hard to hide it. I always wonder how people get around this. What books did you read, general ones, not the ones you use for interviews that crow “here’s how to design twitter”
- contingencies 6y agoThere is no external source of truth for complex or wicked design problems (other than the intended use or market). The best you can hope for is a library of stimulating reference works, exploratory processes, personal habits and muses to assist. It has been said with some truth that successful design tends to iterate between broader and highly specific contexts, and utilizes an iterative approach to solutions rather than attempting to successfully anticipate all requirements with one initial design. The author of this piece seems to be using "systems design" as a synonym for the broader perspective design thinking, both at the level of emergent system properties and commercial implications, and while he raises some good points it seems a bit shotgun in focus and the long-form article format a mismatch for the subject matter. I have a library of largely design-related fortunes which I start my terminal with, they are useful to me for design thinking stimulation purposes and are optimized for brevity. Many are derived from books or papers. https://github.com/globalcitizen/taoup https://github.com/globalcitizen/taoup