8 ms·

Don't create for an imaginary group of people

240 points by sarvasvkulpati 5y ago

wrnr 5y ago
What do you suggest we do and what do you except the voters, managements, shareholders, jury, customers and parent will think about it? I don't care what they think, or want to but seems to me that is what most people do all day.
Animats 5y ago
Seems to be more of a personal problem of the writer: "Many of my high achieving friends had an underlying anxiety and discontentedness." The more common "creating for an imaginary group of people" problem is creating a product for a too-narrow niche. You see a lot of those if you go to VC presentations. It's classically a problem of writers writing their first bad novel.[1] [1] https://youtu.be/yYvkICbTZIQ https://youtu.be/yYvkICbTZIQ
- sebmellen 5y ago
  What an phenomenal band and song... My god.
- fighterpilot 5y ago
  Why is a very narrow niche as a starting point a bad thing?
- svantana 5y ago
  > creating a product for a too-narrow niche In my experience, the opposite is more common. Instead of just nailing core feature A, devs start thinking that users will want features B, C and D as well. And this is before even entering beta.
contravariant 5y ago
The worst variation of this is people inventing and subsequently refuting an argument that some group of people allegedly made. It's almost becoming rare for someone to refute a political argument in a direct discussion.
- AceJohnny2 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
- tacticalmook 5y ago
  Build a straw man to "represent" a group, then refute its argument to deter the target group from ever joining the discussion.
- mistermann 5y ago
  Do you have a kind of "What has been seen cannot be unseen" feel about this? For me, once I noticed this behavior in people, I now see it constantly, and not just with politics, but with any idea that supports the categorization of humans. And I think it's particularly sneaky, because it seems like people who do it perceive their thinking to be logical, due to it containing logic, which is a similar error. I wonder if there is a way to fix this problem, kind of like a software patch for the nodes in a cluster. In this case though, the nodes seem to be resistant to patching, even if they might desire it...like there's some sort of other software (or something) preventing it.
  - contravariant 5y ago
    That "cannot unsee" feeling you have seems like the best remedy to me. Though it's tricky to bring up, if you're not careful you might be perceived as part of the imaginary group with it's imaginary infuriating argument.
    - mistermann 5y ago
      I don't get much remedy from the feeling, mainly curiousity!
noobermin 5y ago
This reminds me of this video[0] of a philosophy teacher who argues that we've entered a new era of "identity" where identities are based on curated profiles vs. what it used to be, around so-called "authenticity." One of the aspects of that is our identities are curated now to appeal to the "average online follower" (he calls it the "general peer") which is an abstraction of the "typical" person we cater to to get engagement (likes, follows, etc). [0] Forgot video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0 Timestamp when he talks about the general peer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0?t=1228 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0?t=1228
maverickJ 5y ago
>"You need to create for an audience of one that you understand well. An audience of one is specific. Whether it’s you or someone you know well, there are clear preferences that you can cater to. They have a manageable number of needs and pieces of feedback. Which means that creating for an audience of one is specific and attainable. You have a goal post that can tell you whether you scored or didn’t, so failure and success are both explicitly defined. Now, you know what to make, but more importantly, you know exactly when you’ve failed making it." Interesting quote. What was not mentioned is how to find the audience for what you create; whether it's a new thing with a new market to be created or an improvement on an existing thing with an existing market. An interesting blog on why it's important to find the right audience for your work is https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/cracking-the-who-you-show-your-work https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/cracking-the-who-you...
- berkes 5y ago
  I'm a fan of Ash Maurya's Running Lean (ISBN-10: 9781449305178) and the Lean Canvas methodology it describes. The entire premiss of that book is to avoid "faceless audiences" but to talk actual people that you think should or could be your customers. Once you know it is important to find the right audience, the next step is to actually find them and engage. Which is what this "lean canvas" thing is about.
- rikroots 5y ago
  > What was not mentioned is how to find the audience for what you create; whether it's a new thing with a new market to be created or an improvement on an existing thing with an existing market. This. 100% I have an imaginary audience that I've curated over the years. I use them to critique my draft poems. These voices are people I've met, both online and in real life, in various poetry forums and workshops. They are people who have given me valuable advice about draft poems - advice that I've internalised over time to the point where I can self-critique my new work as I redraft without needing to constantly badger the real 'them' for feedback. They are the people I want to write poems for - even if they don't know it. OTOH when I listen to an audience of one - me - for feedback on some non-poetry work[1] then I do it knowing that the work is going to end up as Outsider Art[2]. This state of affairs doesn't particularly bother me, but sometimes I do get sad that I've taken paths that real people are unlikely to be interested in. Maybe in fifty years the Posterians will notice, like they noticed Wilfred Owen back in the 60s. [1] - I posted links to some of my less mainstream works a couple of days ago in another comment, so no need to repeat myself here. [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art
josephg 5y ago
There's great power in scratching your own itch and building the tools and software you want for the real problem you have right now. But on the flip side, a lot of the software regular people use for their jobs is awful. As software engineers we've built lovely tools for ourselves (development environments, version control, etc). We've scratched our own itch. But we collectively don't feel a lot of empathy for folks in other industries. So they end up with bad, missing or massively overpriced software as a result. The answer is to go outside, and make friends with people who aren't software engineers. Pick up a hobby or a craft. The best software is always made out of necessity.
- hogFeast 5y ago
  I think the problem with the author's POV is posing the problem as a choice between making for yourself or making for no-one (by trying to please other people). Trying to please other people is how a market economy functions. You do not produce the things that you would ideally want to produce but the things that other people need. I think the issues you raise are totally correct, and don't just apply to entrepreneurs. Most developers will, if given the choice, build complexity into products. They will develop things that are fun to develop, not fun to use. And when people want to build a new business, they will usually try to build things that are fun to build...not many people want to build things for water treatment plants or waste disposal operators, that isn't fun or cool. So I think there is a way in the middle. You should be guided by your own want (but that want should be the product, not building the product) but business is about serving customers. The puzzle over market fit is strange to me...if you aren't building something that other people need, that isn't a business. You have to respond to the market, other people as much as be guided by your own beliefs. Side-note: you see this in almost every walk of life. Craftsmen prefer old techniques that are fun but result in lower quality. You see it in medicine. Investing is an interesting one too...you only get paid if the world comes round to your view but some people will actively shut out the opinions of other people...that ends badly 100% of the time because you are shutting out the only information that will stop you from making a bad decision (eventually).
  - galaxyLogic 5y ago
soheil 5y ago
I was reading this strongly expecting it to be about startups and avoiding creating a product for non-existing users. It was such a pleasant surprise to learn this is about not comparing yourself to others and living a happy life. I think it's more than a coincidence that the right answer in these two vastly different areas overlap so neatly.
DoreenMichele 5y ago
It helps enormously to know who you are trying to reach. This doesn't necessarily have to be a single person, but, yes, know your audience is terrific advice. I think we write or create for some faceless other in part because it's easy to criticize and criticism is rampant and people are happy to dog you, your writing or your creation for any old reason. People start trying to figure out how to defend against that and it's not unreasonable to want to defend against that, but it can end up putting the cart before the horse. If you are writing or creating from a defensive position first and foremost that will impact the creation. It will tend to be all defensible facade and little real substance behind that. Get to know your audience, try to make sure your audience is some specific individual or some real group of people to whom you can genuinely relate and then consider tweaking it defensively after the fact.
Igelau 5y ago
I don't know. For example, I'm not even active on Twitter but rabid social media lynch mobs scare the hell out of me. Sometimes an imaginary group of people imagines itself into existence and decides you will be the main character of its crusade. Am I allowed to use the word "black" to describe a visual aspect of an evil character? Am I allowed to release code with a master branch? What if I misgender or deadname someone accidentally? What if I don't have a code of conduct? Creating anything right now is fscking terrifying.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ipaddr 5y ago
  As someone not on twitter I haven't noticed them. I would leave twitter behind. A twitter crusade doesn't last too long either, the mob is smaller than they appear and can't keep up with attacking everyone at once plus they crave novelty outrage. Yesterday's outrage doesn't cut it and emotions go flat.
- ludocode 5y ago
  This is akin to being afraid of going outside because you might be hit by a car. Yes, innocent pedestrians get hit by cars and well-meaning people get hounded by Twitter mobs. These things are awful and we should strive to eliminate them. But it's also rare enough that you shouldn't let it stifle your creativity. Don't worry about Twitter coming after you over some misunderstanding. There are far more important things to worry about. I'll tell you my biggest worry: making something no one wants.
  - Igelau 5y ago
    Thanks. That's a really helpful perspective.
riazrizvi 5y ago
It’s great advice to focus on a real user experience. It’s easy to get seduced by intellectual thought experiments about user convenience, that don’t translate into real enjoyment that drive real people’s behavior. I’ve made this mistake often, even when trying to predict my own enjoyment. The subtle thing here is that experience is emotional, not mechanical. It can be difficult to stay attuned to your emotional intuition while you are analyzing and coding all day.
dkarl 5y ago
This went in the opposite direction to what I expected, but I think I agree with it. I expected it to be about getting feedback early and often from real users, but it was about trusting your own feelings about a project. Both are valid approaches and better than fretting about the imagined reactions of people you aren't getting direct feedback from.
- berkes 5y ago
  > about trusting your own feelings about a project was also when I started disagreeing. Sure, your gut-feeling is a good guidence. Asking yourself "do i need this polished" or "would I stop using the software if X is removed" is great advice. I disagree because I think better advice is to make it slightly more scientific: "Most people would jump ship to a competitor if I remove X" is easily proven (just remove it), but also researchable: remove it for a cohort. Ask 10 random customers. Check your event-log or database if X is actually used currently.
colordrops 5y ago
This article didn't go where I was expecting it to, but I liked where it ended up. I thought it would suggest a data driven approach, but it instead said to ignore everyone else and just follow your heart, which is more humanistic and a needed message right now.
kazinator 5y ago
The implication is that if you don't have an audience, it should be you. Instead of Faceless Other, create for yourself.
- gfodor 5y ago
  I just spent the last year doing this and the trap with this is that you may end up building something that you love but nobody else does, or at least not enough that you can reach them easily.
EZ-Cheeze 5y ago
"Do it for yourself" is great creative advice that I've gradually arrived at on my own. I have been creating something that I have shown to maybe a couple hundred people and none of them connected with it on any meaningful level. To me, it's the best thing ever and I'm obsessed with it, but no one else seems to get it or like it. But somehow I keep the project alive exactly because I really am doing it for myself. Yes, I do hope that others will also grow to love it eventually, but it's not the main motivation. If it were, I would have gone crazy by now.
- SeriousM 5y ago
  Could you tell us more about your project?
musicale 5y ago
Apple famously ignores its users because typically users just want cheaper/faster versions of what they already have; faster or cheaper horses rather than bicycles or cars. Smartphone users already had devices they loved like BlackBerry and Palm Treo, not to mention Nokia, etc., but Apple stupidly introduced an "iPhone" that was very different from what smartphone users expected and were asking for. iPhone was like a shrunken version of the failed Microsoft Tablet PC, but without the nice stylus and Windows compatibility. Nobody besides Apple fanatics wanted one - until they actually saw it in action. All of a sudden a Treo-like Android phone didn't seem viable anymore, and Android had to pivot. Ironically Apple did eventually end up delivering cheap, fast UNIX machines that run all day on batteries and fit in your pocket or backpack.
JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
I think it extends even further than that. Don’t live for an imaginary group of people you think are watching you. I find myself doing that a lot and it is so silly.
eesmith 5y ago
Persona development in user-centered design (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(user_experience) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(user_experience) ) puts a face on the imaginary group by developing a single persona to represent that group. Of course, there are many possible users, so there may be many personas. Persona development lets you decide which one or two to prioritize. Cooper use the term "The Elastic User" to describe what this essay describes as "The Faceless Other", and the associated vagueness. If you are writing software for software developers then you can likely follow the HP approach - "design for the guy at the next bench". If you write software for non-software developers, it's harder to know if your personal views are a good guide.
meristem 5y ago
Meanwhile in UX it is all about understanding the Other, the specifically Not Me, and creating products for a researched, understood and empathetically engaged many.

wrnr 5y ago

What do you suggest we do and what do you except the voters, managements, shareholders, jury, customers and parent will think about it? I don't care what they think, or want to but seems to me that is what most people do all day.

Animats 5y ago

Seems to be more of a personal problem of the writer: "Many of my high achieving friends had an underlying anxiety and discontentedness." The more common "creating for an imaginary group of people" problem is creating a product for a too-narrow niche. You see a lot of those if you go to VC presentations. It's classically a problem of writers writing their first bad novel.[1] [1] https://youtu.be/yYvkICbTZIQ https://youtu.be/yYvkICbTZIQ

sebmellen 5y ago
What an phenomenal band and song... My god.
fighterpilot 5y ago
Why is a very narrow niche as a starting point a bad thing?
svantana 5y ago
> creating a product for a too-narrow niche In my experience, the opposite is more common. Instead of just nailing core feature A, devs start thinking that users will want features B, C and D as well. And this is before even entering beta.

contravariant 5y ago

The worst variation of this is people inventing and subsequently refuting an argument that some group of people allegedly made. It's almost becoming rare for someone to refute a political argument in a direct discussion.

AceJohnny2 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
tacticalmook 5y ago
Build a straw man to "represent" a group, then refute its argument to deter the target group from ever joining the discussion.
mistermann 5y ago
Do you have a kind of "What has been seen cannot be unseen" feel about this? For me, once I noticed this behavior in people, I now see it constantly, and not just with politics, but with any idea that supports the categorization of humans. And I think it's particularly sneaky, because it seems like people who do it perceive their thinking to be logical, due to it containing logic, which is a similar error. I wonder if there is a way to fix this problem, kind of like a software patch for the nodes in a cluster. In this case though, the nodes seem to be resistant to patching, even if they might desire it...like there's some sort of other software (or something) preventing it.
- contravariant 5y ago
  That "cannot unsee" feeling you have seems like the best remedy to me. Though it's tricky to bring up, if you're not careful you might be perceived as part of the imaginary group with it's imaginary infuriating argument.
  - mistermann 5y ago
    I don't get much remedy from the feeling, mainly curiousity!

noobermin 5y ago

This reminds me of this video[0] of a philosophy teacher who argues that we've entered a new era of "identity" where identities are based on curated profiles vs. what it used to be, around so-called "authenticity." One of the aspects of that is our identities are curated now to appeal to the "average online follower" (he calls it the "general peer") which is an abstraction of the "typical" person we cater to to get engagement (likes, follows, etc). [0] Forgot video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0 Timestamp when he talks about the general peer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0?t=1228 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QMHOsfjHq0?t=1228

maverickJ 5y ago

>"You need to create for an audience of one that you understand well. An audience of one is specific. Whether it’s you or someone you know well, there are clear preferences that you can cater to. They have a manageable number of needs and pieces of feedback. Which means that creating for an audience of one is specific and attainable. You have a goal post that can tell you whether you scored or didn’t, so failure and success are both explicitly defined. Now, you know what to make, but more importantly, you know exactly when you’ve failed making it." Interesting quote. What was not mentioned is how to find the audience for what you create; whether it's a new thing with a new market to be created or an improvement on an existing thing with an existing market. An interesting blog on why it's important to find the right audience for your work is https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/cracking-the-who-you-show-your-work https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/cracking-the-who-you...

berkes 5y ago
I'm a fan of Ash Maurya's Running Lean (ISBN-10: 9781449305178) and the Lean Canvas methodology it describes. The entire premiss of that book is to avoid "faceless audiences" but to talk actual people that you think should or could be your customers. Once you know it is important to find the right audience, the next step is to actually find them and engage. Which is what this "lean canvas" thing is about.
rikroots 5y ago
> What was not mentioned is how to find the audience for what you create; whether it's a new thing with a new market to be created or an improvement on an existing thing with an existing market. This. 100% I have an imaginary audience that I've curated over the years. I use them to critique my draft poems. These voices are people I've met, both online and in real life, in various poetry forums and workshops. They are people who have given me valuable advice about draft poems - advice that I've internalised over time to the point where I can self-critique my new work as I redraft without needing to constantly badger the real 'them' for feedback. They are the people I want to write poems for - even if they don't know it. OTOH when I listen to an audience of one - me - for feedback on some non-poetry work[1] then I do it knowing that the work is going to end up as Outsider Art[2]. This state of affairs doesn't particularly bother me, but sometimes I do get sad that I've taken paths that real people are unlikely to be interested in. Maybe in fifty years the Posterians will notice, like they noticed Wilfred Owen back in the 60s. [1] - I posted links to some of my less mainstream works a couple of days ago in another comment, so no need to repeat myself here. [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art

josephg 5y ago

There's great power in scratching your own itch and building the tools and software you want for the real problem you have right now. But on the flip side, a lot of the software regular people use for their jobs is awful. As software engineers we've built lovely tools for ourselves (development environments, version control, etc). We've scratched our own itch. But we collectively don't feel a lot of empathy for folks in other industries. So they end up with bad, missing or massively overpriced software as a result. The answer is to go outside, and make friends with people who aren't software engineers. Pick up a hobby or a craft. The best software is always made out of necessity.

hogFeast 5y ago
I think the problem with the author's POV is posing the problem as a choice between making for yourself or making for no-one (by trying to please other people). Trying to please other people is how a market economy functions. You do not produce the things that you would ideally want to produce but the things that other people need. I think the issues you raise are totally correct, and don't just apply to entrepreneurs. Most developers will, if given the choice, build complexity into products. They will develop things that are fun to develop, not fun to use. And when people want to build a new business, they will usually try to build things that are fun to build...not many people want to build things for water treatment plants or waste disposal operators, that isn't fun or cool. So I think there is a way in the middle. You should be guided by your own want (but that want should be the product, not building the product) but business is about serving customers. The puzzle over market fit is strange to me...if you aren't building something that other people need, that isn't a business. You have to respond to the market, other people as much as be guided by your own beliefs. Side-note: you see this in almost every walk of life. Craftsmen prefer old techniques that are fun but result in lower quality. You see it in medicine. Investing is an interesting one too...you only get paid if the world comes round to your view but some people will actively shut out the opinions of other people...that ends badly 100% of the time because you are shutting out the only information that will stop you from making a bad decision (eventually).
- galaxyLogic 5y ago

soheil 5y ago

I was reading this strongly expecting it to be about startups and avoiding creating a product for non-existing users. It was such a pleasant surprise to learn this is about not comparing yourself to others and living a happy life. I think it's more than a coincidence that the right answer in these two vastly different areas overlap so neatly.

DoreenMichele 5y ago

It helps enormously to know who you are trying to reach. This doesn't necessarily have to be a single person, but, yes, know your audience is terrific advice. I think we write or create for some faceless other in part because it's easy to criticize and criticism is rampant and people are happy to dog you, your writing or your creation for any old reason. People start trying to figure out how to defend against that and it's not unreasonable to want to defend against that, but it can end up putting the cart before the horse. If you are writing or creating from a defensive position first and foremost that will impact the creation. It will tend to be all defensible facade and little real substance behind that. Get to know your audience, try to make sure your audience is some specific individual or some real group of people to whom you can genuinely relate and then consider tweaking it defensively after the fact.

Igelau 5y ago

I don't know. For example, I'm not even active on Twitter but rabid social media lynch mobs scare the hell out of me. Sometimes an imaginary group of people imagines itself into existence and decides you will be the main character of its crusade. Am I allowed to use the word "black" to describe a visual aspect of an evil character? Am I allowed to release code with a master branch? What if I misgender or deadname someone accidentally? What if I don't have a code of conduct? Creating anything right now is fscking terrifying.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ipaddr 5y ago
As someone not on twitter I haven't noticed them. I would leave twitter behind. A twitter crusade doesn't last too long either, the mob is smaller than they appear and can't keep up with attacking everyone at once plus they crave novelty outrage. Yesterday's outrage doesn't cut it and emotions go flat.
ludocode 5y ago
This is akin to being afraid of going outside because you might be hit by a car. Yes, innocent pedestrians get hit by cars and well-meaning people get hounded by Twitter mobs. These things are awful and we should strive to eliminate them. But it's also rare enough that you shouldn't let it stifle your creativity. Don't worry about Twitter coming after you over some misunderstanding. There are far more important things to worry about. I'll tell you my biggest worry: making something no one wants.
- Igelau 5y ago
  Thanks. That's a really helpful perspective.

riazrizvi 5y ago

It’s great advice to focus on a real user experience. It’s easy to get seduced by intellectual thought experiments about user convenience, that don’t translate into real enjoyment that drive real people’s behavior. I’ve made this mistake often, even when trying to predict my own enjoyment. The subtle thing here is that experience is emotional, not mechanical. It can be difficult to stay attuned to your emotional intuition while you are analyzing and coding all day.

dkarl 5y ago

This went in the opposite direction to what I expected, but I think I agree with it. I expected it to be about getting feedback early and often from real users, but it was about trusting your own feelings about a project. Both are valid approaches and better than fretting about the imagined reactions of people you aren't getting direct feedback from.

berkes 5y ago
> about trusting your own feelings about a project was also when I started disagreeing. Sure, your gut-feeling is a good guidence. Asking yourself "do i need this polished" or "would I stop using the software if X is removed" is great advice. I disagree because I think better advice is to make it slightly more scientific: "Most people would jump ship to a competitor if I remove X" is easily proven (just remove it), but also researchable: remove it for a cohort. Ask 10 random customers. Check your event-log or database if X is actually used currently.

colordrops 5y ago

This article didn't go where I was expecting it to, but I liked where it ended up. I thought it would suggest a data driven approach, but it instead said to ignore everyone else and just follow your heart, which is more humanistic and a needed message right now.

kazinator 5y ago

The implication is that if you don't have an audience, it should be you. Instead of Faceless Other, create for yourself.

gfodor 5y ago
I just spent the last year doing this and the trap with this is that you may end up building something that you love but nobody else does, or at least not enough that you can reach them easily.

EZ-Cheeze 5y ago

"Do it for yourself" is great creative advice that I've gradually arrived at on my own. I have been creating something that I have shown to maybe a couple hundred people and none of them connected with it on any meaningful level. To me, it's the best thing ever and I'm obsessed with it, but no one else seems to get it or like it. But somehow I keep the project alive exactly because I really am doing it for myself. Yes, I do hope that others will also grow to love it eventually, but it's not the main motivation. If it were, I would have gone crazy by now.

SeriousM 5y ago
Could you tell us more about your project?

musicale 5y ago

Apple famously ignores its users because typically users just want cheaper/faster versions of what they already have; faster or cheaper horses rather than bicycles or cars. Smartphone users already had devices they loved like BlackBerry and Palm Treo, not to mention Nokia, etc., but Apple stupidly introduced an "iPhone" that was very different from what smartphone users expected and were asking for. iPhone was like a shrunken version of the failed Microsoft Tablet PC, but without the nice stylus and Windows compatibility. Nobody besides Apple fanatics wanted one - until they actually saw it in action. All of a sudden a Treo-like Android phone didn't seem viable anymore, and Android had to pivot. Ironically Apple did eventually end up delivering cheap, fast UNIX machines that run all day on batteries and fit in your pocket or backpack.

JohnJamesRambo 5y ago

I think it extends even further than that. Don’t live for an imaginary group of people you think are watching you. I find myself doing that a lot and it is so silly.

eesmith 5y ago

Persona development in user-centered design (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(user_experience) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(user_experience) ) puts a face on the imaginary group by developing a single persona to represent that group. Of course, there are many possible users, so there may be many personas. Persona development lets you decide which one or two to prioritize. Cooper use the term "The Elastic User" to describe what this essay describes as "The Faceless Other", and the associated vagueness. If you are writing software for software developers then you can likely follow the HP approach - "design for the guy at the next bench". If you write software for non-software developers, it's harder to know if your personal views are a good guide.

meristem 5y ago

Meanwhile in UX it is all about understanding the Other, the specifically Not Me, and creating products for a researched, understood and empathetically engaged many.