@aral humm, not sure I understand where your UI ends.
-
-
@aral we don’t ‘think results’, we think through doing. thoughts are messy. sometimes reducing friction means more UI… -
@jamiebullock Sometimes :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@aral it does raise a question of privacy though. That level of friction is sometimes necessary for privacy between the user and the system -
@jasonharitou Indeed. No doubt we will discuss such things more in the coming years :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@aral there is nothing in cognitive psych to support your truism. We NEED feedback to help us process the world around us. -
@daveixd Indeed. If I thought water and got water, that would be feedback. -
@aral but where does the thought come from? How do you guide flow, demonstrate capability? How do you know that water is even an option?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@aral Agree, but in the real world we interact with physical objects. Touch and feedback as important as thought and intention -
@stevecarpenter Of course, I define UI as that which exists within the screen. It is part of the interface of an object, not the whole of it -
@aral@stevecarpenter I like the original wording@aral had though. Future interaction will only involve a thought, not screens or touches. -
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.