Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Flat Sink

sachagreif.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 153 posts

Re: The Flat Sink

#141

Post by ebf »

sgdesign wrote: post #125
ebf wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone pushes a statement as a fact and not as their opinion then they better be prepared to back it up it with evidence. End of story.

It's my blog! Do you really want me to prefix every single sentence with "it is my opinion that…"? Feel free to do that in your mind if you want to, this way it won't bother other people.

I would like for you to provide evidence for your statements, more than just a single screenshot.

>Put everything on the same plane, and you make it harder to focus on a specific section of the page.

How does a person draw a conclusion then without any evidence? Seems like confirmation bias to me.

>Get rid of all texture, and you might end up with cold, sterile designs that scare users away.

What's the point of making such statements that do not seem to be drawn from actual real world experience or data? Great, you have an opinion backed by what exactly? A personal emotional response to such designs? Do you actually avoid such designs? What is the value in making statements that have no backing data?

Did or does anyone say that Google's design might alienate users? It has always been one of the most sterile designs of any search engine or portal.

When people on the news make such statements, we laugh at them because we know they are just making these comments to get hits or views. They are trying to create controversy or lead people to agreeing with them when there is no evidence to back it up. It is analogous to fear mongering.

My biggest beef is people upvoting these types of posts. These posts are basically just piggybacking on general sentiments on Hacker News. Sure, at first glance, people tend to agree with them (see the +200 upvote count), and writing them may get the author some minor publicity, but when you attack them critically, you see they are not founded on any strong evidence. They are intellectually lazy posts.

And it isn't just you, it's all of the tech community that does it, and I am tired of it.

Re: The Flat Sink

#142

Post by ebf »

delluminatus wrote: post #90
baddox wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a skeptic (i.e. scientific skeptic), then you default to not believing a claim until evidence is introduced to support it. Is it intellectually lazy to say "citation needed" to someone that is accusing someone else of being a witch? I firmly believe that I have no obligation to prove that I am not a witch, and moreover that such attempts would be impossible. The person who makes a claim that has not been wi…

Thoughtlessly saying "citation needed" is a recipe for an insidious confirmation bias. It is always intellectually lazy, in the same way that blindly accepting provided claims is intellectually lazy: it allows the reader to avoid thinking about the claims in question. Citing a study is not a panacea for bad ideas, and lacking citations is not a death sentence for truth. Hacker News saw an article just the other day o…

> It is always intellectually lazy, in the same way that blindly accepting provided claims is intellectually lazy: it allows the reader to avoid thinking about the claims in question.

I did think about the statement, and I thought it was untrue. Then I asked for evidence to support the claim. Is that intellectually lazy, or is the original post intellectually lazy?

Regardless, 5-10 minutes after I posted "citation needed," I backed it up with examples, and followed up on subthreads with more points.

Re: The Flat Sink

#143

Post by ebf »

corresation wrote: post #136
ebf wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone pushes a statement as a fact and not as their opinion then they better be prepared to back it up it with evidence. End of story.

If someone pushes a statement as a fact and not as their opinion It is clearly a subjective, editorial piece. The infantile demands that every statement be prefaced by "In my opinion, " (where such is painfully obvious already) is a nonsensical tactic when someone simply disagrees with the subject matter.

My point is that these types of posts are always upvoted on HN because they latch onto the latest general sentiments of the community. They are intellectually lazy posts that are not backed by anything besides some analogy the author has drawn to prove a point. As someone with a vested interest in design and UX, it pains me to see people upvote this.

Re: The Flat Sink

#144

Post by pbreit »

pretoriusB wrote: post #133
kalms wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The aforementioned approach is recommended to avoid spreading flu virus, and other winter time bugs. If you want to avoid your kids getting sick, I can recommend getting them a flu vaccine. Probably safer than relying on a faucet containing the exact amount of virus you need to develop antibodies.

> The aforementioned approach is recommended to avoid spreading flu virus, and other winter time bugs. Citation needed. I've never met the "do not touch anything dirty after you washed your hands" and "close the faucet with a paper towel" (!) as a recommendation against spreading flu virus. Especially if by "dirty thing" you mean the faucet handle.

Citation needed for "reducing e touching of things that other people touch helps avoid catching a contagious ailment"? Down vote.

Re: The Flat Sink

#145

Post by crazygringo »

crazygringo wrote: post #32

I stayed with a friend in a then-new building designed by Philippe Starck, in New York. The bathroom sink faucet handles were very cool -- just smooth steel cylinders sticking out, that you rotated. Until I tried turning them with my now-soapy hands... and discovered that they were impossible to turn, because there was nothing to grab onto! His stylish cylinders turned out to be completely useless. Turns out knobby h…

OK, just so everyone doesn't think I'm an idiot who puts soap on his hands before the water...

I had already turned on the faucet, gotten my hands wet, soaped up, and then when rinsing, realized it had gotten too hot and wanted to change the temperature so I could rinse without burning my hands... Man, people below are treating this like a brain-teaser!! ;) haha..

Re: The Flat Sink

#146

Post by pretoriusB »

pbreit wrote: post #144
pretoriusB wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The aforementioned approach is recommended to avoid spreading flu virus, and other winter time bugs. Citation needed. I've never met the "do not touch anything dirty after you washed your hands" and "close the faucet with a paper towel" (!) as a recommendation against spreading flu virus. Especially if by "dirty thing" you mean the faucet handle.

Citation needed for "reducing e touching of things that other people touch helps avoid catching a contagious ailment"? Down vote.

>Citation needed for "reducing e touching of things that other people touch helps avoid catching a contagious ailment"? Down vote.

Depends on the ailment, Einstein. If its virus doesn't survive outside the body (which a lot of them do not), then "reducing the touching of things" does nothing.

And if the chances of catching it from a faucet are minuscule compared to someone having it breathing in the same room as you, then again, "reducing the touching of things" (especially when you already washed your hands) will gain you very little.

Ever heard of profiling and diminishing returns?

Re: The Flat Sink

#147

Post by MaysonL »

ebf wrote: post #22

>Put everything on the same plane, and you make it harder to focus on a specific section of the page. Citation needed. Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted, tell me that https://svbtle.com/ content isn't on the same plane and still readable? You can have everything on the same plane and with proper use of whitespace and good typography, it can be very readable. Other examples: http://daringfireball.net/ https://medium.c…

Whenever I run into a blog with the un-subtle design, I hit the Readability bookmarklet: I can't stand the garish logos.

Re: The Flat Sink

#148

Post by fudged71 »

ebf wrote: post #22

>Put everything on the same plane, and you make it harder to focus on a specific section of the page. Citation needed. Edit: Since I'm getting downvoted, tell me that https://svbtle.com/ content isn't on the same plane and still readable? You can have everything on the same plane and with proper use of whitespace and good typography, it can be very readable. Other examples: http://daringfireball.net/ https://medium.c…

A functional interface needs to be understood. With each new interface you use, you load a new set of metaphors and interactions into your brain to help you navigate, understand, and use whatever it is that you are using. The interface needs to be relatable, or at least offer an explanation of how to use it. Having more experience with interfaces will make you more familiar with different design patterns and such, but there is a limit to how much we can relate to.

This isn't about readability, but rather usability, so I find your examples poor. It's not just about typography and whitespace. Yes, they are simple and on the "same visual plane", but they follow design patterns that have existed on the web for many years: Navigation placement is on the top and left, links are either underlined or highlighted. On the other hand, svbtle is using bizarre navigation visual cues at the top which need some level of inspection or trust to use, and medium doesn't have a standard navigation at all. They are designing away elements of the webpage that people are familiar with.

Re: The Flat Sink

#149

Post by tedunangst »

rijoja wrote: post #135
brandoncarl wrote: post #75

My wife and I have encountered these at many hotels over the past few years. The reason is environmental: the sink is supposed to splash if you turn the water too high. It's intended to keep you from wasting water.

if the reason is to avoid unnecessary water consumption, wouldn't it be better to limit the rate of the water? Less water is used and nobody gets wet and annoyed.

Low flow faucets make you look cheap.

Re: The Flat Sink

#150

Post by jamesbritt »

ebf wrote: post #141
sgdesign wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's my blog! Do you really want me to prefix every single sentence with "it is my opinion that…"? Feel free to do that in your mind if you want to, this way it won't bother other people.

I would like for you to provide evidence for your statements, more than just a single screenshot. >Put everything on the same plane, and you make it harder to focus on a specific section of the page. How does a person draw a conclusion then without any evidence? Seems like confirmation bias to me. >Get rid of all texture, and you might end up with cold, sterile designs that scare users away. What's the point of makin…

Thank you. I was somewhat puzzled why this article got so many up-votes. It didn't seem to say anything new or interesting. I half expected it to end with, "I'm beginning to think that form ever follows function."

It's not that the article is wrong per se, it's that it states some fairly obvious ideas that are true in a broad sense (e.g. a user needs some visual guidance to make sense of a page; designing for looks at the expense of function is a Bad Thing) while being horridly weak in the details and specific examples.

Since there's little substance to the article it mainly serves as a kind of flag for taste preferences. People agree or disagree with the general sentiment, but when pressed to explain why most can't. I think this is why there was a such a reaction to "citation needed"; the annoying realization that one's opinions are merely anecdotal observations with no ready means of objective verification.

The question (perhaps rhetorically) was asked if posting "citation needed" ever lead to a worthwhile follow-up discussion. I'm thinking probably not.

Anecdotal observation: It's occurred to me that when people make obviously non-personal assertions, and they have some backing evidence, they tend to post it with their comment. If you don't see the citation it's likely because the poster hasn't any, and asking for it will be met with silence (or possibly derisive dismissal of the idea of being asked for evidence).

I attribute this to people asking for supporting links often enough that many posters think it's expected of them. I would like to think this is true.

Post reply on HN