4 ms·
It's pretty obvious that most poster here don't understand and don't want to understand your article. Most of them are invested in software. Pretty bad software
by gambler 5y ago
It's pretty obvious that most poster here don't understand and don't want to understand your article. Most of them are invested in software. Pretty bad software, probably. It seems the only way they can feel good about what they use or develop (often not by any real choice) is by constructing an imaginary past where everything was absolutely awful and comparing the current tools to such imaginary past. Anything that undermines that meta-narrative must be immediately responded to with shallow off-point comments to reduce the cognitive dissonance.
- dredmorbius 5y agoThanks. Part of the entire project is to see what the response is, and how it responds (if at all) to different communications methods. Challenging assumptions, let alone slaying sacred cows, is a fraught task. And to correct a misapprehension: it's not that the 1970s-era office phone ecosystem was better. It's that it was different than the set of affordances and features of present comms devices and systems embody and the underlying design understanding evidences. In the earlier Reddit piece the article references, the immediately preceeding concept addressed was Chesterton's Fence. Many here are eager to move it.