Week 4: Cluetrain/HCI

Cluetrain Manifesto

Like a lot of manifestos, this one is passionate and hammers its philosophy over and over again, till you feel flattened and overwhelmed. Though, I liked the over-the-top funny expressions and sarcasm and also identified at some levels with the anti-corporate overtones of the writing, I could not appreciate the length and verbosity. “Life is too short, we die,” Chapter 1 says. Wish the author had kept true to this idea and cut out some of his “magic-mushroom enthusiasm.”
I think the Cluetrain is on the right track as far as the basic idea the writers are trying to make:

“A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies.”

The Web has helped people from all the over world connect at some levels. This is certainly true in case of mass media. The rise of UseNet, chats, and blogs have all helped people converse outside the Big Media box.
However, I must say these connections are very fragile and not as widespread as the authors would like us to believe.

Here is why I disagree:
There are many who are still outside the conversation even after many decades of the hyperlink.
Also, instead of being a connected whole, the market is getting increasingly demassified and people are mostly looking for their custom experience.
Another aspect overlooked by the writers is that not all conversation is productive. There is still a lot of spamming and flaming and snooping. I’m not too sure if left to ourselves, people/users will be able continue a civil and productive conversation for too long.
I think the writers were disillusioned by the corporate culture (and sometime rightly so). Therefore their agenda is to discredit corporate management as bumbling idiots that just get in the way of innovation and real human conversations.


Gestalt theory and HCI (human-computer interface)

The Gestalt approach emphasizes that we perceive objects as well-organized patterns rather than separate component parts. Even if the perception is based on an optical illusion, the brain sees it as a “whole,” structured, cohesive picture.
The challenge for designers of (products or Web designs) is to translate these natural, built-in perceptions (affordances) we have into the product so that we can interact with that product with natural ease.
The problem with screen-based, graphical web designs is that we don’t always have a natural built-in perception about it since it is so new and our senses have not yet developed a relationship with it. So designers have to rely on ‘perceived affordances’ or what the user perceives as possible. Therefore, a lot of good design relies on observing how people actually use the product/interface.
In some cases, cultural conventions come into play. That makes me wonder, whether designs developed in certain parts of the world may not resonate with other world citizens. Then how do we standardize? Who gets to standardize? Countries with the most bandwidth and technology resources?