Hacker News Reader

Comment by ylere | Hacker News Reader

I like how it trains you in noticing issues in alignment, spacing, font setting etc. But as others noted it mixes clear mistakes with highly subjective opinions around size, shape and color choices and even dark patterns while suggesting to use this test to filter out job candidates for design positions [0].

While there might be some merit to this method for educational purposes I'm generally wary of fully automated assessments as they often include hidden biases like in this case and just end up enabling you to hire the same kind of people all the time (which admittedly already is an issue with human assessments/interviews, so lets not make it worse).

[0] https://cantunsee.space/business

View on HN

That's a bummer, I was thinking this was more of a game to recognize design little details in widespread applications (Facebook, iMessage, iOS...) - so in that view the "subjective opinions" were not subjective but how those apps are doing design choices. Not saying they are good because, for example with the 'Skip' button in the Facebook example, people can't tell if that's actually a clickable button from the first sight, which is a terrible design in usability terms. Not sure who came with that "designing secondary buttons as if they were not buttons" thing, but the first time I saw them was with Android Lollipop and their then-new "material design".

Putting what you're saying in perspective only tells that even now employers are helping to the dribbblisation of design[0][1][2] - and helping developers hate us designers even more.

[0] https://www.intercom.com/blog/the-dribbblisation-of-design/ [1] https://medium.com/intercom-inside/the-dribbblisation-of-des... [2] https://graphically.io/blog/the-dribbblisation-of-design/

> which is a terrible design in usability terms.

Depends on the goals...

I'm betting it's the perfect design for what it's intended to achieve.

And what goal would that be you’re betting on that would override established accessible web text contrast ratios?

Obviously, creating a dark pattern so that people don't click the button that most benefit them, but the button that most benefit the company.

Parent’s comment is probably suggesting it’s an intentional use of a black pattern where the goal is to discourage skipping.

I misinterpreted OP's comment, thanks for the clarifications. A company deliberately choosing not to adhere to accessible web standards because dark patterns benefit the company by converting more users in their sales funnel.

This needs to be regulated against, it only grows and gets worse over time.

> and helping developers hate us designers even more.

This is off-topic, but since I have you... Would you happen to have an idea about why designers don't seem to engage in OSS much? There's a wealth of open source software (and developers), but I've never once seen a designer open a PR fixing some design/UX issue...

I think it often boils down to everyone having an opinion about design/UX. When fixing a software bug in a PR there is often a fairly clear subset of "correct" solutions, but when it comes to design/ux the set is generally bigger and everyone (even non-designers) will have an opinion on how it should look.

Hm, maybe, bikeshedding is a killer in these things... I haven't even seen people attempt it, though. Maybe they all got scared away by us developers years ago?

UX is rarely a very rewarding process. It's not nearly as much fun as writing new software. OSS often has the same problem with bug fixes, which are also less fun than adding new features.

It's even worse than bugs, since bugs are usually localized, while UX issues often require substantial redesign even for something that feels like a very specific issue. That puts you in front of a whole lot of stakeholders, and even more work, for something that isn't going to feel nearly as big an accomplishment as adding a new feature.

So unless you get a UX programmer who also happens to be interested in your particular open source project, things will stay for years. That's a lot easier for programmer's tools than for anything that requires domain experience.

It actually seems like a really cool idea as a trainer for "non-UI-oriented" developers (that end up building UI anyway) -- minus all the subjective and dark pattern stuff.

Early in my career I worked with a really great graphic designer. Up to that point, I thought I was "decent" at doing UIs, as I was proficient in the technology (HTML/CSS), and could take a sketch/mockup/photoshop/whatever and turn it into something usable. We were basically building custom templates that worked on top of a custom CMS/shopping engine (pre-Wordpress/etc), usually matching some existing customer branding, so it wasn't exactly 1:1 from design to implementation.

What consistently amazed me was that then the graphic designer would take what I did -- even just doing minimal modifications like adjusting spacing/sizing/color -- and make it look 10x better. I quickly learned that my design talent was severely lacking, and that Photoshop/HTML/CSS/etc skills are totally independent from UX/design skills.

I still think there's lots of programmers that haven't experienced this type of thing and believe being good with the tools == being good at design. Systems like Bootstrap make things a bit more interesting, because it becomes easier to fall into the pit of success, but it doesn't substitute.

A good "game" like this seems like it would help to break the mindset of some of these programmers because fundamentally once you start recognizing things like mixed icon styles, misaligned elements, or inconsistent font styles, you really can't un-see it.

For the blindness to good design by programmers, there is the eyesore of the tk tutorial: https://tkdocs.com/tutorial/widgets.html#checkbutton I am not sure if tk has to look like this.

> What consistently amazed me was that then the graphic designer would take what I did -- even just doing minimal modifications like adjusting spacing/sizing/color -- and make it look 10x better

Ha. I do this for my team, but I still don't consider myself a great designer. All I can really do is correct mistakes, and create something clean looking. The best graphic designers I've worked with all had this ability to pull a whole look and feel from thin air. It's really impressive.

I like how they didn't capitalize the input placeholder for "job e-mail address" when they're emphasizing attention to detail, and placeholder capitalization was one of the questions.

https://cantunsee.space/business

If they can't pass their own test, should I be trusting their testing method?

Plus that whole page is outright unreadable: tiny, jagged font with terrible contrast ratio.

It’s an “8-bit” theme, for non-obvious reasons.

Their decisions were not subjective at all. At least if you accept "most correct" to mean "most standard", when you think it might be ambiguous. I've been working on software and interfaces for over 20 years and actually agreed with the entire game, 100%, without a single disagreement.

I was really pleasantly surprised.

Even the dark pattern one, where it was "incorrect" for the skip button to look like a button?

Yeah, that was the one that made me immediately stop "playing". If dark patterns like that are "objectively" correct, then I would much prefer to be objectively wrong.

The justification was "one button with default style", the solution used is the same as Facebook which is clearly a dark pattern.

Not subjective at all about drop shadow or letter spacing or button padding? It feels like we've squeezed every ounce of art out of the UI. I would not have thought that revelation about UI decisions would make me sad tonight but there it is.

There is no consensus on buttons' rounded corners. Square corners are fine, or you'll have to explain why it's not.

Or shadow offset. Or kerning. Gave up in the the "hard" section because it became "spot the Apple defaults".

It would be interesting to archive this and see what holds up 15 years from now.

Your comment tempts me to clone this idea and apply it to the now outdated "Web 2.0" aesthetic.

* choose the correct drop-shadow for headline text

* is inner bevel or outer bevel more "corporate" looking?

* 20px rounded corners should be applied to:

   a) boxes

   b) buttons

   c) ALL TEH THINGS!!! <- this is the correct answer

Web 2.0... Don't forget the TAG clouds!

and gloss, it was all about the iCompany

And huge RSS buttons, don't forget your oversized RSS button. You could even implement a feed as well if you have some time to spare.

Of course there's a subjective component.

Design choices are intrinsically subjective but also perfectly valid. Subjective doesn't merely mean that all choices are equally valid and it really doesn't matter which one you choose.

"Subjective" in this context means that you can't mecahnically use simple measurements, properties or heuristics to analyze correctness. That's perfectly fine. It's what designers are trained for and paid to do.

Awesome, happy to be educated (despite the subjective questions). But I'd like the next game to train designers how to use tools like Figma properly (by that I mean if they knew how to design using auto layout - flexbox for devs - it would save millions of dollars a year).

True. Example was easy 3/10 for example (Hope it is always the same). I think the suggested design is a plain dark pattern.

Still a good site about how important typography, spaces and small details can be.

I wonder if it's a good way to hire "people who job with technology".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com