The shock of the new

Revision as of 15:01, 28 October 2021 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs)

Random thoughts on the impermanence of modernism.

The design of organisations and products
Survivorship bias waiting to happen. AKA: Seemed like a good idea at the time.
Index: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

The curse of novelty

What is new cannot last as the new. Either it dies, or it grows old. So if your only quality is novelty, you will die young. Conclusion: build with qualities other than novelty. If only novelty gets you out of the gate — enjoy your fifteen minutes. Blondie had it backwards: Stay pretty? Die young.

Clean lines and flat panels don’t age well. They don’t take dirt. Old structures do age well. Dirt and grime enhances them: gives them an air of permanence. This is maybe a variety of anti-fragility. If your sense of modern is such that it is rendered vulnerable by atrophy, rather than simply stoic, and dignified, steer clear of it. Dirt is noise. Dignity is signal. Don't benefit from survivor bias that strips noise from signal.

Innovation and plausibility

Legaltech plausibility heuristic — ask: why hasn’'t it been done before now?

Good answers: “The technology did not exist before now.” “The regulation did not allow it till now.”

Bad answers: “The market is not yet ready for it.” “Customers lack the necessary vision.”[1]

Most nascent legaltech has only bad answers.

(“AI”, machine learning, neural networks ≠ “tech that didn't exist till now”.)

See also

References

  1. This is another way of framing the observation: “we do not understand what our customer wants”.