Manny

@mannimoki.bsky.social

Designer, educator, technologist, growth-seeker. He/Him 🏳️‍🌈 mannyikomi.com

"What is the ROI of UX?" is shaped like a question, but it is actually two hostile premises: 1) that UX is sufficiently marginal for its value to be openly questioned 2) that the asker has the authority to judge this question, and practitioners are merely consulted on it, as a matter of courtesy

A very timely read for tech workers right now. My favorite takeaway as it applies to cross-functional teams, especially for designers: "in order to master your own domain, the boundaries of your specialism will often blur with specialists in other domains."

Robb Owen@robbowen.digital · last yr.

Back when I was finding my feet in tech everybody was buzzing about building positive change. Somewhere along the way, something changed. Fortunately for us though, tech is not the first industry forced to defend itself against dubious practices. What might we learn if we were to look elsewhere?

You don't necessarily need to say "image of" in your alt text for users to know it's an image. Screen readers will announce that it's an image. But it can help readers to specify if it's a hand-drawn image, Polaroid, infographic, screenshot, chart, map, diagram, or so on.

So called 'gender critical' thought is unscientific, reductionist, and incompatible with the historical record. Human history is undeniably and richly populated by endless examples of multiple gender identities and roles, decoupled from biological sex, throughout time, across continents & islands

Something I realized about the convos around the Ghibli styled images generated by Open AI, is that a lot of people rely on legalities. They have no sense of internal ethics. We have to fight to make sure the law is on the side of ethics. Slavery was legal but that doesn’t make it right.

UX design is in disarray. The idea of design-for-use has been replaced with design-for-sales, and its incentives (make more features so that you have more shit to sell) don't align with user-centered work. In this issue, I investigate the ground-level view of how this happened and how to stop it.

Why design goes wrong and how to set it right, part 1

At the root of design's crisis is an incentives crisis throughout tech. But we have tools that let us cut through the magical thinking of feature factories - if we're willing to use them.

productpicnic.beehiiv.com

Something I've noticed is that when someone says, "can I ask a stupid question?" during a teaching session, this is almost always followed by the most interesting discussion of the session It's one of the things I look forward to most about teaching

By excluding these “edge cases” it also further perpetuates the bias that “[insert marginalized group here] doesn’t use our app”. Strengthening and perpetuating the cycle through even more self-selection and exclusion, leading to more feature factory product teams.

dorian@doriantaylor.com · last yr.

was thinking about this again in the context of "edge cases", arguments software programmers make for not addressing some particular constituency or other (eg localization, accessibility) because each consideration only represents a sliver of the population and gets in the way of shipping…

18F, the federal government’s technology shop, was just demolished by Musk’s team. It was a cost-recoverable org, charging agencies for their expertise, using a consulting model. Its cost to government was negligible, its benefits huge. My team there once saved DoD $500 million. A thread about 18F:

Waldo Jaquith@waldo.net · last yr.

18F is *precisely* what Musk and team claim should exist within government. But when his team found it, they destroyed it, because it is evidence that government works well (can’t have that!), and because like Zelensky, 18F didn’t bend the knee.