Can't Unsee
cantunsee.space
cantunsee.space
However, this is how we train machine learning systems. I enjoy this as a social or artistic commentary in that way. How would you like to be trained this way, or what do you learn from being trained this way.
It implies, all knowledge is a convention we adopt and the ability to match or reproduce it.
---
I can do what the task asks, almost entirely, score TDB, but it reminds me of surveys with rigged questions. It's technically correct, technically a majority of people answered questions in a predictable way, and "predictable" will be argued "correct".
Searching for fallacy leading questions in surveys, I found https://www.cagw.org/thewastewatcher/fallacy-surveys-and-stu... examining misleading net neutrality surveys cited in Congress, a mix of topics able to draw discussion.
I'd be interested in this quiz extended to explicit A/B testing of design. Or with more samples gathered.
Most of it very subtle, I agree, but I think it's hard to argue against any of the questions being subjective.
Yeah, it looks nice, but so do nice clean rectangular edges. This test is missing context, in that sense it is pretty subjective.
Some of the alignment issued were fairly objective, many of them were not, e.g. some vertical alignment ones. Ofc you want consistent alignment, but you simply can't look at two images to figure out what is 'correct'. That's a design decision.
There were several where the text between the two appeared to be different, but resolved to the same during compare.
But you don't get to be a hard engineer without solving hard problems without any help. Just toughen up and study. :/s
Perhaps these claims are the result of A/B testing and measuring differential engagement. In which case: Cool! That we lowly internet addicts can guess or determine the most effective from design rules, aesthetic preferences, and stockholm syndrome (kidding, a little).
The solid camera icon is off-center (it looks smaller, mangled), but the hollow versions of the mic and camera effectively communicate if they are "on" or not and are sized correctly.
No thanks.
So I guess this dark pattern is now being elevated to a design best practice...
This site is a disservice to the entire field of UI design, not to mention the users. At the very least they could have explained _why_ de-emphasizing secondary options or cropping information out of photos is "more correct"
To the site author: your suggestions considered harmful, just give me my 90s-era UI design back, please.
Then again, I'm not a UI designer. But I wonder what a UI designer thinks of someone boiling his/her design judgement down to a simple 'correct vs. incorrect' choice.
The page instead just makes it white, like it wasn't a button at all and we can only guess by the word only making sense for button
That would look absolutely whacky. Especially in responsive design, where the aspect ratio of the parent container changes with screen width.
The difference is that thumbnail images aren't TV shows, it doesn't really matter if the image is cut off. Its not supposed to have literal information, its just a contextual hint of what that element is doing / is related to.
Using color to differentiate actions is OK, if you are doing styling actions those are different than, say, templating actions.
Promoting obfuscation or misdirection as good design is inexcusable.
It's not so much about choosing the "better" design (although in most of these cases one of them is objectively better), but choosing the design used in the real app.
Ideally it should be regular button with outline and some greyish color, but not completely hidden button.
Btw. quite easy for someone working in QA.
Whoever did this has a good eye for design, so I'm surprised by the assumptions he makes in what is right and wrong. Some of the answers depend on the overall design decisions of the UI and you can't say what's right and wrong by one example.
The "invite friends" / "skip" is an awful example. One button should be default but the contrast is so great that it's much more suggesting a dark pattern than a good UX.
"invite friends" / "skip"
"invite friends" / ""
On a side note, easy to compare by crossviewing.
It's a known fact that typefaces that have curved, humane shapes are more legible. That is why it is bad practice to use something like futura for long text.
I am assuming rounded corners in boxes follow that logic.
Really though, some design aspects are objective, but some are not. The author of the page seemed to be relatively on point though about whats objective and whats not.
.... then it was bad option
Do you really think that the person who made this does not understand that taste is subjective, rounded corners are not necessarily preferred etc? Do you think that they believe that there is only one right way to do things? Of course they don't. That's not the point of the game.
They are inviting you to participate in a subjectively chosen design system and see how quickly you can learn and adopt the rules of the game. In the process they are teaching you to pay attention to figures of merit and details that are subtle and foundational.
Put it this way - if someone can score highly on this game, I would be much more confident that they are technically competent enough (and thoughtful enough) as a designer to be able to go out and cook up something totally new and different, without rounded corners or whatever.
If someone is not able to calmly interpret the good intentions of the game, or if they are not able to quickly adopt the rules of the design system that is presented, then I would be more doubtful of their chances of cooking up great design themselves - although of course it is not at all out of the question.
But... it also had a handful of places that infuriated me--like made me viscerally angry at the state of society level angry, where if you answer the way the game wants you to I hope to not only not hire you but de-friend you :/--and of course none of them were "rounded corners".
I then went back to the comments expecting--based on your comments--to waltz back here into a discussion about rounded corners to "lay down the law" about how horribly evil the designers are that agree with stuff like "make the skip button not look like a button so no one knows to click it as it is really really important that we get them to invite their friends for our product virality and KPIs, so you won't get promoted if that number goes down!" and...
...well, you were just wrong about the discussion: almost no one here (hell: I didn't even see a single example, but I was, admittedly, skimming to get the zeitgeist) is arguing about rounded corners :/. (edit: OK, in a more careful read I found one, but it was buried in a more substantial argument. I also don't think it was even correct as I remember the example being about inconsistent border radius, not "corners should be round".)
Instead, the vast majority of the comments are about dark patterns and "form should follow function" complaints (as with the aspect ratio of the guitar: the goal of that control is to help a user decide whether to buy the guitar, and if it looks like ass then that matters less than satisfying its job; there are better ways of solving that problem, a la Pinterest's continuous grid, but they are going to cause other problems involving fairness... but like, if we aren't going to do that then, at best, we should be helping the user choose a different photo if we are going to insist on cropping it like that, not just cropping it "because our app looks so fugly with your silly image in it").
There were a few people I saw complaining about contrast, and that was in fact the only other place I lost some points (though, I will admit, in the opposite direction from the people here correctly arguing about accessibility... but, in my defense, I went that direction in my answers due to cynical beliefs about designers: I believed the Search box needed even less contrast as nothing else had been given much contrast ;P).
Exactly this is the point I got hung up, too.
What I'd like to add, though: There are event wo layers of "evil" here:
- The idea that there's a "right" (default) button in a perfectly file selection of two options
- The fact that the example doesn't even style the alternative as a button opts to pretty much hide it instead
I think a good way to really upset people is to tell them that they're wrong. Which I also think is the major factor in the negative comments here.
The game does rate your answers either right or wrong and that upsets people when the answer is subjective.
It's hard to take criticism, especially if it's negative and/or destructive. I think though that the game author could take in the common theme of the criticism here and update the game. Either by adding textual description or updating the problems.
Most brilliant programmers I know are really bad at UI design. Really bad. I think a game like this is very, very helpful to give people the basic tools and jargon to talk and think about UI.
And some of what they deem as right is arguably wrong, or at least is not right without additional context (such as which icons are hollow and which are solid). There is a valid reason for some icons being outlines while others on the same screen are solid.
This site is cute, and what they're trying to do is good; but I wouldn't pay them to build a UI.
A choice between two actions, where the action that most people will want to take doesn't look like a button and more like some misplaced text, while the option that people will only choose by accident is prominent and a proper button? The styles aren't even consistent. Like having a steering wheel only for left turns and a lever for right turns. Utter nonsense.
Care to give a less explicit, more thoughtful justification? Or is it based purely on what jcampbell1 on HN thinks is not pure shit?
It's not about which action is highlighted and which action is not, it's about not having two primary action near one-another which goes against any UI/UX theory and best practice
I selected the one with corners.
It turns out I was wrong, and the reason given was "Border radius".
Yes, the whole thing is super Apple-specific and doesn't make any sense outside of that context.
I think if a photo is essential content (which it is in this case), you should crop as little of it as possible. Though it also depends on whether there's a detail page where you can see the whole thing undistorted, but that's context this example doesn't provide.
There are some fundamental negative usability practices which are popular and get repeated all the time, even by people who claim to be UX experts. The worst is when you (the developer) raise an issue to the team about some UX problems, and they have closed ears because they implicitly trust their "UX expert" (who has a title).
No. I’m right, you are wrong. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Well, user submitted content is going to have to have all sorts of weird aspect ratios. So what's the plan - clip it arbitrarily?
Edit: Apparently, yes.
So by the literal text of this game, most "color blindness compatible" design variants are bad design, and as a severely green-blind person I agree with that.
There was an example where you could see a guitar in full but with some whitespace (with correct aspect ratio, I'm not talking about a later example where it's stretched out), and had the guitar cropped and only partially visible. I prefer to see whole thing so click the one where it's full, but it berates me for "Photo aspect ratio".
Then there was an example of "invite friends", where either "invite friends" was a blue button and "skip" gray text, or where both "invite friends" and "skip" are blue. I choose the latter because I find it a dark pattern to "hide" the skip option, but instead it berates me for "One button with default style".
Oh yes, creating a design requirement of "one button with default style" like a good excuse to do this dark pattern!
Then I was in the middle of writing this comment and I looked back at the comparison, and this time the 'right' answere looked better to me
I don't know who made this, but as a user I would certainly dislike their designs.
The game is basically "find the problem", after which I really want to click on the thing I found and am currently looking at, rather than on the things I didn't find.
Of course some of them are obvious, miss alignments etc, but subtle font decisions such as the "2 hours ago" for the last activity to my eye seems so much nicer.
I scored 6180. randomly selected the last ten or so on hard and got more than half of those right
Me too. Sometimes, things just looked nicer without really knowing what was wrong. Goes to show the power of subconscious perception. TBH, this activity elevated my perception of UX and QC work a lot. This can be hard stuff.
On the other hand, sometimes I felt like I saw color differences that weren't really there.
It's funny, in the past few days I thought about how I never liked FTX as a whole because of their abysmal UI/UX. I always thought their business was less trustworthy just by the look and feel of their website. Kraken, on the other hand, put a lot of detail into their UI/UX and so far, they seem to be rock solid. Some of these crypto exchanges look like poorly adapted Themeforest templates, and I would bet money on their eventual demise.
It's kind of ironic to make this design mistake on a site dedicated to raise awareness about design decisions
Like, I get that the "2h" sign is meant to be de-emphasised, but there's a level of contrast beyond which becomes unreadable. If so, why put it there in the first place?
For example, it's always incorrect to have clickable button without any kind of border and same color like background and it does it for "skip". It's just dark pattern to funnel people into clicking stuff you want with technically giving a choice.
It also have some slides where both have absolutely awful contrast and asks to pick "less wrong" option (HN also gets that terribly wrong, light gray text on lighter gray background).
A lot of it is also designer preferences like "SQUARE BAD"
Are roundrect corners objectively better than right angles? How could they be? But they're definitely what designers have decided to standardize on, and are therefore "correct" for our reality in 2022.
Daring to be different sounds noble in an after-school special, but putting out a mobile app with conflicting call to action or icons that don't line up isn't brave and safe.
Maybe I'm defending it because I scored 7230 with a rank of "SILVER (top 25%)," so I feel special?
I'm no fan of dark patterns, but the most-complained-about prompt here as I type this, the one with "ADD FRIENDS" or "SKIP," is very common, and the alternative of making both options identically blue seems like worse UX to me. Maybe in large part because "ADD FRIENDS" is also so much larger than "SKIP." I suspect many people might feel better if the options were "ADD FRIENDS" as primary, and "MAYBE LATER" as secondary, since they wouldn't feel quit as uneven then.
Speaking as someone who's currently fighting my design team over attention-to-detail, this site has great examples of sloppy design. I don't think the target audience is senior/experience UX designers.
I interpreted "correct" as having correctly identified the example of an existing design, as I imagine I would see if I opened the corresponding apps/websites.
It's amazing what I overlooked by the end. I guessed on one with an obvious typo.
Edit: Mein Gott, contrast people! Contrast! That "grey" bubble is borderline white on my screen
That's just, like, your opinion, man.
"Correct" my ass
Unless only the "hard" section is the crowdsourcing part and the previous sections are a qualification exercise to determine a weight for your votes. Hmmm...
I disagree. A button should look like a button, not like a text (as it does here)