why is everyone hating on this video? i found it really interesting and thought-provoking, and margaret seems very intelligent and sweet.... people are rude
Because, as a commenter below me stated, it's a clear example of obscene corporate bloat. Also, and this is just my opinion (but also that of many others), every time RU-vid or Facebook rolls out a new design, it's only worse than the previous one, including some mindnumbingly baffling design choices.
Why is everyone hating this video They're not! The reason you get that impression from the comments is the reason RU-vid comments are trash - for the most part, people only post a comment when they have something negative to say. For example, I didn't post a comment (excluding this one) because I enjoyed the video and had nothing to add to it. Proof: 700 likes, 100 dislikes. The internet is not all a cesspit of negativity, it's just the vocal minority who make it seem that way :)
MissMuffinToYou Well of course she's going to say that the change was for the better, she's a corporate drone AND she had a part in that redesign. It's like a corporate drone who shipped off customer support jobs to India telling you that it's better that way, having to wait 20 mins on hold & navigate clunky automated menus till you finally get to speak to Pravkesh..I'll give you one easy example: You used to be able to click Show Comments under a RU-vid comment and the whole chain of replies would open up - this feature has been made 1000 times more clunky now.
oh i know its not everyone who's negative, but its definitely way more than most other ted talks i've seen, and it was totally off for me to see because i really enjoyed the speech
The thing you must always remember about the internet : If you're not paying for the product, then YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. You are being sold to advertising companies. You are being experimented upon. You are being psychologically manipulated. Remember the emotion-based research that Facebook, a company whose only product is their users, had experimented on its users by manipulating their news feeds. It's just one example of corporate manipulation of emotion, but it's literally happening all around us at all times of day on the net. A company like Google has the power to manipulate elections if they so desire.
I actually did a video about the fact that Technology has killed privacy and that 1984 showed up 30 years late. LOL. Facebook practically is you giving out a NSA dossier and with smartphones we are all Big Brother 2.0 ourselves.
This silly lady works for Facebook & used to work for RU-vid, 2 sites that constantly change their design FOR THE WORSE. Twitter too, every time either of these 3 sites rolls out a new design all I hear is groaning, including my own.
In this engaging and insightful talk, Margaret Gould Stewart passionately explains about the intricacies of designing work carried out by the huge websites like RU-vid, Facebook etc., A very useful for those who involved in design work, and it is interesting one for others. Highly recommended.
"Being a part of something that is so big you can hardly get your head around it, and the promise it just might change the world" Is it wrong that I jumped straight to thinking of the movie "The Zero Theorem" where a guy works his whole life for a difficult problem that was meaningless?
I really want the rationale behind getting rid of the per person filters for the wall content. It would be fun the hear how they phrase "We want you to see what we want you to see, and not want you want to see".
This felt like a facebook sales pitch. The showing of a photo from her archetype facebook profile, her language was reminiscent of a sales pitch "research shows", "huge impact" etc. I'm disappointed to see the glorification of social media's polarised opinion system on TED. This medium is restrictive, people being designed for are expected not to have a critical thought in their head,
Its so boring to listen to yahoo employees talk about yahoo and LIKEwise its boring to hear facebook employees talk about facebook. SCALE, PROBLEMS, OUR SOLUTIONS. Such challenges, but at the same time dumbed down and tuned down in complexity so a broad audience understands. its the mix that makes such talks completely devoid of surprises and boring to watch
It's a bit of a stretch to say Facebook buttons are something the entire world wants and needs. Talk about living in a bubble. Really interesting topic but it's a shame the way she approached it and her patronizing and condescending tone she used.
Ugh, all of those resources and the designers still couldn't figure out that people want an immediate solution to the picture that could harm their reputation, BEFORE it has a chance to damage said reputation. Try talking to a person sometime
First of all if someone wants their picture removed you just remove it! I hate Facebook. My husband died and he and I shared a facebook page and I forgot our password as we made the page a couple years before and when I got a new phone they wouldn't give me access to our page and now FOREVER is lost lots our personal and private pictures and messages we didn't have public. If anyone has any idea on how I could possibly get access to our page back I would be eternally grateful. Our profile name is even Jessica and Dylan and everything inside the app shows we shared the page so they have no winning argument that it wasnt both of ours. These people care not at all about our emotions as this chick was saying they care only about human experimentation in the form of data.
A good design isn't a question of how long it lasts, but how well the user can use intuitively. A user's preferences and needs constantly evolve as time passes on. The user-base may expand, the demographics may change, or the design's purpose might need to go a different direction. Its only natural that a design itself will need to constantly shift with it. A great example, take a look at Computerphile's "Emoji and the Levitating Businessman" Emoji and the Levitating Businessman - Computerphile A video which goes through the design of how emotes started and evolved. Which back in the day had a great initial design, but as the world evolved and expanded around it the original emotes, its standards, and the hardware which used it had to unexpectedly evolve their designs with it.
For there time, they probably were. Horses were a great mode of transportation for over a thousand years, not so much in last 75.... its a matter of perspective and scale.
When I was in web design class the navigation on the left side was still a thing. in the age where content is king navigation should be on the top. but if your website isn't content heavy left navigation might look better
stinknus I found that left navigation was due to the idea that we read left to right in the western world. I started designing websites a long time ago (1998) "backwards" with right navigation, because I decided the the content was the priority not how you navigate, and that most people are right handed so it would be less work to move the mouse across the screen. This is an example for figuring out the reason behind something and defying convention vs following a trend. It's a very useful design exercise to deconstruct something and adapt it to work differently.
Personally, I only use the messaging part of facebook. I'll sometimes browse the site itself, but only ever on my laptop. So when facebook separated the two, I just uninstalled the app on my phone, and left messenger. The fact is, both are very large apps (ram, cpu use, and data wise), and many (most?) people only need messenger. Additionally, from a programming perspective, it's far easier to optimize an app if the app is smaller. In other words: Faster phone, longer battery life, and more storage. This isn't to say they still don't use a lot of that, but rather, they use less, than if together. It may or may not be a coincidence. Fact is, for me, I prefer the change. Sure, there's a lot of vocal people that don't, but most probably prefer the changes long term. After all, most of these decisions are made through use of statistical models and data.
4:33 "Why would we spend so much time on one small detail??" Because you were able to leverage the rowing twins' idea to make billions of dollars, which you waste on minutiae because you can. At least Google spends it on interesting things like satellite inagery companies and self-driving cars.
Feel like you should just be able to take photos of yourself down without asking your friend to do so. Use AI to match you to your photos. And let you have admin permissions over the photo even if you didn’t upload it.
this video and ideas from ***** just made my day.. ''But what is really hard about designing at scale is this: It's hard in part because it requires a combination of two things, audacity and humility - audacity to believe that the thing that you're making is something that the entire world wants and needs, and humility to understand that as a designer, it's not about you or your portfolio, it's about the people that you're designing for, and how your work just might help them live better lives. Designing for low-end cell phones is not glamorous design work, but if you want to design for the whole world, you have to design for where people are, and not where you are.
Thank you so much Margaret Gould Stewart for sharing your immense knowledge so our team can apply your amazing knowledge to our little website www.dentaltown.com. Howard Farran DDS, MBA
I've always found the rationale of going from the 5-star system to a like/dislike system very silly. It's like saying, "oh, elevator users in this skyscraper mostly use the top and bottom floor buttons. Guess we should get rid of the buttons for all the other floors." Like, seriously? Just because people only use the highest and lowest options, it doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people using the middle ones and finding those buttons essential.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:59 🌐 Designing digital experiences at scale requires audacity and humility, believing in global impact while prioritizing user needs. 02:50 🖌️ Even small design elements matter when designing at scale; meticulous attention to detail is essential. 04:15 📊 Designing with data requires nuanced understanding, combining analytics with empathy to improve user experiences. 08:08 🔄 Introducing changes in user-generated content platforms should be done carefully due to users' attachment to existing features. 11:02 🌍 To design for a global audience, consider the diverse needs and realities of users outside your bubble, including those with limited resources. Made with HARPA AI
Yeah sure, Facebook totally works to answer the needs of the population... *facepalm* This woman is so biased, this is just a big ad for Facebook... Let's take people by the hand and "guide" them through their relationships because they're simply too lazy or insecure to do it themselves. Let's just insert Facebook in the middle of the human links. This stupid centralization for organizations allowing human connections is a big mistake, and we'll realize it soon enough.
To have total control of this planet you have to control as many as you can without them realizing , control of all data on all platforms . Do people think they care if you have a better experience , its all about testing and nudging you into the correct reality they give you .
***** Sorry, but the mere look of a like button is not going to make or break a web service people want. It's an absurd overkill to spend that much time on it.
Yahoo has always been an absolute joke of a site. It's only by sheer miracle that they have survived. They really still live back in the AOL days where people were captives.
This talk is ridiculous. After telling us how big the internet is she shamelessly takes credit for google, facebook, and youtube. I am an engineer. When this women says "design" she actually means "the looks". Aesthetics are important, mass scale enforces this - along with literally everything else. Dont forget that.
you'd be amazed (unless you got used to it) how many people think Design = Looks. Im a designer myself and this makes me rage every time. Hearing it from a person who should absolutely know better makes me lose all hope.
That much talk and that many hours and the design is still not great... I think the question isn't what needs to get done but rather who is doing it and how is their ability to understand intuitive interaction. Facebook is not an example of great design by any means...
Great design is the ability to make something in a way that hasn't been done before so as to create new or improved ways to interact. Every facebook redesign makes their platform harder and more confusing to use...
No it doesn't, not in my experience. You can save certain pages so don't need to search them, easily unfollow people. I don't think fb design is basically on doing things that havent been done before, it's just about connecting people. I think their phone website can do with improvement though.
Fail to see insights from this video. It is not really offering any new stuff. Cross-browser compatibility is not a problem for giant website only. It is actually getting easier with newer browsers comply with standards. Using data analysis to learn about users is not new either. What's new is websites that gather huge user base. But she failed to shed lights on anything that is different between smaller websites and bigger websites. Nor did she share anything unique they learn about their users.
shes has a picture of herself on drugs that she wants taken down. its only funny when you drink your drug. if she smoked her drug this would never air.
This lady promote Facebook as being designed around users and not the other way around...FALSE. I can understand the lack of disLike on Facebook since is a network promoting friendship and you don;t want "friends" disliking your posts.
Crazy wrong. Read The Humane Interface by Jef Raskin. See about using ZOOMING to alleviate the problems of the small screen. BzWeb designed a zooming interface for a cell phone. I think it won prizes but never was introduced as an actual product. TOO DIFFERENT, TOO RADICAL. OK, here's what we do. We make a low cost game that uses zooming all the time. Gamers don't mind learning stuff to play a better game. Make it open source. Foster teams to continually improve the games derived by participants. Then make a browser and wiki to bring such zooming to much wider audiences. But the user interface doesn't stop with the icons. The honesty and integrity of what the company does with the data supplied by vast numbers of users matters too. Failures here will be very costly to the image of the company and its profits.
