thesash

One of my favorite quotes, from Lee Unkrich of Pixar: "We don’t ever finish a film, I could keep on making it better. We’re just forced to release it." http://m.wired.com/magazine/2010/05/process_pixar/all/1

Pixar is such an inspiring company when it comes to creativity, innovation, and values. If you've never seen the excellent documentary "The Pixar Story", I highly recommend it.

There was an article on HN in the last year that addressed this, i.e the amount of knowledge required to understand a complex application from distributed software to assembly language, to hardware. I think the title was something about unknowable depths of complexity, does anyone remember the link?

Clickable: http://beta.whatispolymath.com.

Curation is huge, especially as the number of available resources continues to increase. In the past few months I've either used or thought about using:

http://teamtreehouse.com

http://www.udemy.com/

http://www.udacity.com/

http://www.lynda.com/

http://www.cs101-class.org/hub.php

http://www.codecademy.com/

http://tutsplus.com/

Edit: Forgot http://www.codeschool.com/

...and probably half a dozen more that I can't think of off the top of my head.

I've just been using a google doc to stay organized, but this looks like it would work a lot better, and I would love to see some comparisons between equivalent courses on different sites.

As a marathon runner, I can confirm that even after running for 10 years, there are still many, many days where it just plain sucks. The real secret is that the hardest days, the ones when you're tired or sick or just not feeling it, are the ones that matter the most for your training program.

I think that one important thing to keep in mind is that user experience is much more than just the interface of the product.

Sometimes, a simple shift in metaphor i.e. Hipmunk's gantt chart is enough to substantially improve the UX, but sometimes it requires an entirely new product strategy to do something revolutionary. Consider Amazon Prime. Is the user interface particularly pretty? No, but the experience of using the service truly is revolutionary, and so far no other retailers can match it because the experience is only made possible by supply chain management and distribution that Amazon has in place.

The iPhone UX was revolutionary because it challenged the entire model of interaction between user and phone. The experience of using an iPhone is the sum total of an astounding number of innovations, only some of which have to do with the UI. Consider the hardware innovations from the glass screen to the proximity sensor, to the hi-res screen in the iPhone 4 that no one expected or anticipated. Then there is the ecosystem aspect, which required not only a fundamental re-thinking about how both users and developers would interact with technology, but also massive distribution which was already in place through iTunes. Of course, the multi-touch interface, and the laser focus on developing quality software for email, messaging, phone, and music, played a huge role in overall UX, but they would not have been possible without the other innovations.

I guess it really all just goes back to the fact that design is how it works, not how it looks, which requires a deep understanding of the problem and needs of the customer, not just the ability to arrange pixels in a pretty pattern on the screen.

I bought it, it has some of the nicest interaction design I've seen in an iPhone app, and is worth the 99 cents just to see a product that rethinks some of the interaction metaphors that dominate the platform. I don't see this replacing my todo list of choice workflowy, mainly because it is iPhone only and doesn't follow my todo list metaphor of choice, which is org mode style collapsible outlines.

This is so inspiring, especially after having read and followed some of Bret Victor's previous work. You can literally see the progression of his thoughts moving towards this, demonstrating that he really is driven by inventing along the principal of immediate feedback for creators.

http://worrydream.com/MagicInk/ http://worrydream.com/KillMath/ http://worrydream.com/InteractiveExplorationOfADynamicalSyst... http://worrydream.com/ScientificCommunicationAsSequentialArt... http://worrydream.com/DynamicPicturesMotivation/ http://worrydream.com/ExplorableExplanations/ http://worrydream.com/Tangle/

I think psd versioning is outside of github's core competency. We've used distributed version control for design files, and it really doesnt support a natural workflow. Background syncing just seems much more natural as a solution to the problem since the files tend to be very large, and are compounded by rapid generation and disposal of many many versions.

From my response to this comment on the blog:

If "swinging for the fences" requires 24/7 work, chances are you're not focused enough, not validating your ideas fast enough, and from my experience, you're probably wasting a huge amount of your time doing on inefficient work or unnecessary stuff that will be scrapped entirely. That being said, starting small and focused does not eliminate the possibility of building something big.

To build on your baseball analogy-- who wins more games, the team with the most homeruns or the team with the most hits? 37 Signals proves the analogy-- a series of simple, focused, products, that started small and have achieved massive success.

Unfortunately, the entrepreneurial success story tends to get corrupted by the noisy example set by tech blogs, and pundits glorifying the investment cycle represented by companies like Groupon, Yelp, etc, rather than the quiet success stories of much more common but less high profile businesses that simply create things that people want and are willing to pay for.

What results is confusion in the minds of young entrepreneurs between what it means to build a business and what it means to swing for the fences. Big ideas start can start small, and that does not preclude the possibility of swinging for the fences, but building the business should be the motivation and the priority, not visa versa. In fact, starting small, cultivating a product, and staying relentlessly focused on customer happiness is the right way to sart a business regardless of how big your ultimate ambitions are.

Simple advice, but important. The resume is an important piece simply for consideration, but beyond that, I'm much more interested in a candidate with less impressive education or experience and a stellar portfolio of projects.

How about Facebook? I was among those applauding "The Hacker Way" earlier today, and their manifesto of making money in order to build a better service [http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2012/02/hacker-way.html], but Zynga makes up 12% of Facebook's revenue!

You're absolutely right, copying creative ideas is not illegal, and making it illegal wouldn't solve anything. Unfortunately, the reality is that as long as it is possible to make make money by operating unethically (read: forever), businesses will do it.

Call me naive, but I would at least like to believe that these types of practices cannot sustain a business forver, and eventually a player who does things the right way will win out.

This reminds me of the whole Curebit debacle from this weekend. Is outright copying of design/creative/game mechanics illegal? Maybe, maybe not. Is it wrong? Hell yes!

What makes me really sad is thinking about how many talented engineers and designers there are working at companies like Zynga, doing a kick-ass job of building clones for companies with no values.

Thats a really pretty illustration of the concept that "failed" designs are the most important part of the journey to the one that works. They've certainly explored a vast number of disparte approaches, excited to see where it ends up.

There is almost a 4th, higher order tool here, one which is implied through each of the three, and that is: determine (and articulate) your values.

This is a beautiful and interesting concept, but isn't this really just a dressed up command line interface? This is a feature I would absolutely love to have, but I don't see it replacing the menu in the form demoed for the simple reason that this violates one of the core principles of user-centered design: visibility. If the user has no visual indication of what is possible within the system, how can we expect them to learn the interface?

One super simple example of this: http://cl.ly/082D441E2D0L1l3d3g2Y

Most readers of Hacker News are probably aware of the calculator feature in the Spotlight in Mac OSX, but if I had a dollar for every time I've blown someone's mind by showing it to them, I'd be counting money right now rather than writing this comment. The bottom line is, visibility is an extremely important design principle, because it informs the user what they can do within a system, so hiding possibilities is probably not a good idea.

For detailed reading on the principle of visibility, check out Donald Norman's Phenomenal The Design of Everyday Things, which I firmly believe should be required reading for anyone thinking about building anything: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385267746/ref=as_li_ss_tl?... [yes, it is an affiliate link]

This really is a great project, and has come a long way in the past year since or so since I first came across it.

After writing a post about how much value the Hacker News Google+ Circle added to my search results for technical queries when google turned on social results (http://thesash.me/how-google-got-its-groove-back), I got to thinking about how that could be applied to other interests, and then came across this. It seems to me that despite all of the hand-wringing surrounding the launch of social results and the implications for SEO, following experts in a variety of areas adds a pretty impressive layer of value to search.

"Step 1 - Learn enough to get a clue." There is so much information available online today about anything you need to know. It's seriously mind boggling to me that people can't seem to figure out how to do things.

"I can't figure out how to sync my calendar with outlook" >> hmm, I don't know, let me google that for you: http://bit.ly/y3Zp0E

"How do I make this ad 'print ready'?" >> Ditto http://bit.ly/ABlo1I

"How do I remove the meat from a drumstick?" >> Ditto http://bit.ly/ynAvAb

"How do I build a realtime web app?" >> Ditto!!! http://bit.ly/xgZHix

I think the problem here is that many people have been trained by years of formal education to approach problems from a perspective that if you need to learn something, a formal process is required to gain that knowledge. What sets people who are "resourceful" apart from those who are not, then, boils down to a fundamental difference in the way in which they approach problems. Instead of assuming that they cannot do something until proven otherwise, resourceful people assume they can do something until proven otherwise.

I really hope we are moving towards a new understanding of design. The tendency of those who do not understand what design is to lump it in with "art" has been detrimental to the development of products, services, and software by those who focus too much on one aspect of the design process while ignoring others. If engineers, marketers, managers, business executives, etc. (as well as some misinformed "designers") had a better understanding of the balance of aesthetics, economics, usability, and feasibility inherent in good design, the world would be a better place.

Cross posted from this google+ thread: https://plus.google.com/108998673146368660257/posts/VnnVUJjq...

Great article, I think that one of the biggest barriers to people becoming entrepreneurs is the failure to grasp the fact that there is a vast spectrum in the skills (technical or otherwise) needed to get a business off the ground.

However, while I agree with your point that "I'm looking for the right cofounder" is really only an excuse covering up either a reluctance to jump in or an idea out of reach, there comes a point in any business (Maybe once you come up against an unforeseen technical problem, difficulty securing partnerships, ), when it becomes necessary to bring great people on board in at a co-founder level who complement your skills and make up for your shortcomings. The key here is having access to the right people, so that you don't have to "look" for the right people.

I think that in this case what determines your ability to recruit the best people comes from your "Network reach" which varies from person to person, but is something that must be cultivated as diligently as technical knowledge or business knowledge, by maintaing the right relationships, associating yourself with the right communities and groups, connecting people with each other, and carefully training yourself to recognize and maximize opportunity when it arises.

Watch the video-- the interviewer literally asks the question about application of the technology, and Ungar gives several including business analytics, intelligent cities, associate search, basically anything that has to do with extracting meaningful information from massive data sets.

Despite concerns about compatibility, usability, and future accessibility, this project is ridiculously awesome simply because it pushes the boundary of what's possible in the browser. Bold strokes like this are what move technology forward.

Great example of constraints driving minimalism through necessity, therefore keeping the focus on what really matters

I was really surprised that this didn't roll out with the major redesign of the web app a few months ago... Guess they were just waiting to make sure they got it right. The social aspect of this really brings a layar of legitimacy that I find lacking in yelp, google places, etc.

Cool, looking forward to seeing it grow

The number of users is the wrong metric to measure in this debate, its the trend that tells the story. One service is growing, the other is in free fall.

http://www.woorank.com/en/www/myspace.com

Is MySpace growing exponentially? No. They are continuing to hemorrhage users while services like Google+, Tumblr, and Pinterest see explosive growth.

Inspiring numbers for a bootstrapped, private company, and a strong reminder that if you're building a business there are viable alternatives to the SV funding cycle

Love the idea, this could be killer if it were more complete

Suggestions (didn't see anything from these come up in my initial searches):

Teamtreehouse.com

lynda.com

codeschool.com

codeacademy.com