I’m not an artist. But I’ve worked with my fair share of really great artists and the impression I’ve always been given is that great art comes from consistenc

I’m not an artist. But I’ve worked with my fair share of really great artists and the impression I’ve always been given is that great art comes from consistency of vision. In other words it matters a great deal to them what shade of blue they use or how thick a line is. This isn’t a mindset I, as a programmer, understand. But I’ve seen great art come of it and the people making that great art have told me it’s important. (I've also seen lousy art generated by committee which just backs up that claim) I think that is the root of this conversation. What Doug Bowman et. al are saying is there are different ways of doing things and Google doesn’t realize that. They think everything can be done from an engineering standpoint and that’s a philosophy that kills the drive of most creative people. So when you say "why not let an algorithm figure it out" you’re missing the creative person’s point. (You said there "is TONS of great human-driven design" inside Google but I don’t know where you get that information from. That’s not the way I’d always heard it)