Quote from
By Dan Saffer
Andy Ihnatko wrote, “My philosophy is ‘It’s much better to be upset with yourself for having done something stupid than to be upset with a device that made the wrong decision on its own initiative.’”
The story of the iPhone going off in a concert hall made me wonder about the possibility of implementing a warning or status popup message. Perhaps, there could be a popup (feedback) saying something like, "By turning your phone to silent mode set alarms will still ring." Personally, I find a lot of feedback messages to be easy to dismiss as it’s additional text. Yet, it’s wise to explain to users ways in which a feature or mode works.
“The Start button is just a visual cue—a faux affordance—so that people know to “push” (when they will actually just tap) it to start.”
I find this example (a tap that will be triggered by touching anywhere on the Metro screen kiosk to start) a good example of human-centered design. As a user, your first attempt to tap on the screen will successfully give you feedback— which will be like the ones after the first screen. Yet, this first tap is only a generalized affordance of the way in which you will be interacting with the Metro kiosk– touching the screen. In a way, this faux affordance takes makes sure that no one can fail to receive feedback from the first attempt at touching the screen. So, the user can feel curious to see if the digital buttons on the following screen will also continue to get back the desired feedback.
“As our applications and devices become more sensor-full and context-aware, the more ability they could have to make decisions on their own about how they operate.”
This quote speaks to the direction our society is going in with the continual integration of artificial intelligence technology in more aspects of our lives. As interaction designers, we have a say in all the possible ways in which the lives of users could be impacted. Do we design microinteractions to empower or deceive users? Are there aspects of peoples’ lives that should be off-limits for design considerations? I think it's important to consider where we want to design for user autonomy.
“As our applications and devices become more sensor-full and context-aware, the more ability they could have to make decisions on their own about how they operate.”
This quote speaks to the direction our society is going in with the continual integration of artificial intelligence technology in more aspects of our lives. As interaction designers, we have a say in all the possible ways in which the lives of users could be impacted. Do we design microinteractions to empower or deceive users? Are there aspects of peoples’ lives that should be off-limits for design considerations? I think it's important to consider where we want to design for user autonomy.