5 ms·

I can’t find the article but I read a piece years ago about Google algorithmically trying to optimize sign-up links / a button, and the algorithm being in a fee

I can’t find the article but I read a piece years ago about Google algorithmically trying to optimize sign-up links / a button, and the algorithm being in a feedback loop with the A/B testing. It talked about finding the perfect, to-the-pixel placement for a button. That was when I knew design was dead in practice at Google. There are so many other under-optimized parts of the experience that I have no idea how “if I could only find the perfect position on the screen for a button” became the question someone was willing to throw that level of engineering at. It’s missing the forest for the trees x 10^100.

grey-area 5y ago
I think I read about their ‘data driven’ decision on the colour of links. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/05/why-google-engineers-designers https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/05/why-googl... The problem with this sort of decision making is it ignores context and is liable to optimise one metric under study at the expense of other more important things (like user trust and retention). It also tends to bias towards easily measured small changes measured in isolation so it encourages blind decisions made without context or coordination. For example a certain colour might mislead users into clicking more by making a link look like the purple default visited link colour. It makes clicks go up but may not increase user satisfaction.