4 ms·

So pinterest is a fail?

• Firehed 14y ago
  Not inherently; this is just another example of "correlation is not causation". There are plenty of ugly things/websites easy to use, and pretty things that are hard to use. There are also plenty of pretty things easy to use, and ugly things hard to use.
• devcpp 14y ago
  "!=" as "non-identical sets", not "mutually exclusive sets". This is generally the expected behavior of the "!=" operator in sets.
  • brianfryer 14y ago
    Thanks, devcpp. This is exactly what I meant.
• oxide 14y ago
  Nice logical fallacy.
  • TeMPOraL 14y ago
    It's not a logical fallacy. People complain about 2-column layout of timeline and 2+-column layout of this "new look", because they have too many columns to follow at the same time, while I have yet to see anyone complaining about 5+-column layout of Pinterest.
    • pessimizer 14y ago
      It's also a logical fallacy to argue against "people" instead of bryanfryer, who said nothing of the sort.
    • bengillies 14y ago
      I believe it falls under the Association fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy). The assumption is that because both designs share a common attribute they are both intended for the same purpose and therefore if one design is bad for a particular reason, the other design must also be bad for the exact same reason. This isn't necessarily true with Pinterest, which has a different purpose to Facebook, and therefore likely requires a different UI.