Your emotional response to the ways things look and feel is a "function" as valid as a button or a slider. Actually, it's more functional in the digital ecosyst

Your emotional response to the ways things look and feel is a "function" as valid as a button or a slider. Actually, it's more functional in the digital ecosystsm where everything is a symbolic abstraction of light except for your emotional response to their meanings-- it's in fact the only real outcome of the design intent. So if you see it as a problem and not a strength of modern visual design you are fully clueless, no offense. "You… go to your closet, and you select… I don’t know, that lumpy blue sweater, for instance, because you’re trying to tell the world that you take yourself too seriously to care about what you put on your back, but what you don’t know is that that sweater is not just blue, it’s not turquoise, it’s not lapis, it’s actually cerulean. You’re also blithely unaware of the fact that, in 2002, Oscar de la Renta did a collection of cerulean gowns, and then I think it was Yves Saint Laurent, wasn’t it?… who showed cerulean military jackets... And then cerulean quickly showed up in the collections of eight different designers. Then it filtered down through the department stores and then trickled on down into some tragic casual corner where you, no doubt, fished it out of some clearance bin. However, that blue represents millions of dollars of countless jobs, and it’s sort of comical how you think that you’ve made a choice that exempts you from the fashion industry when, in fact, you’re wearing a sweater that was selected for you by the people in this room… from a pile of 'stuff.'"