eight golden rules of interface design

As we dedicate an increasing fraction of our time interacting with software — from airport check-in terminals and parking meters, to desktop and mobile applications —  digital interface design is becoming as important as physical architecture in improving our experience of the world.

Here are Professor Ben Schneiderman’s Eight Golden rules for optimally designing that experience (drawn from his classic text, Designing the User Interface):

1 Strive for consistency.
Consistent sequences of actions should be required in similar situations; identical terminology should be used in prompts, menus, and help screens; and consistent commands should be employed throughout.

2 Enable frequent users to use shortcuts.
As the frequency of use increases, so do the user’s desires to reduce the number of interactions and to increase the pace of interaction. Abbreviations, function keys, hidden commands, and macro facilities are very helpful to an expert user.

3 Offer informative feedback.
For every operator action, there should be some system feedback. For frequent and minor actions, the response can be modest, while for infrequent and major actions, the response should be more substantial.

4 Design dialog to yield closure.
Sequences of actions should be organized into groups with a beginning, middle, and end. The informative feedback at the completion of a group of actions gives the operators the satisfaction of accomplishment, a sense of relief, the signal to drop contingency plans and options from their minds, and an indication that the way is clear to prepare for the next group of actions.

5 Offer simple error handling.
As much as possible, design the system so the user cannot make a serious error. If an error is made, the system should be able to detect the error and offer simple, comprehensible mechanisms for handling the error.

6 Permit easy reversal of actions.
This feature relieves anxiety, since the user knows that errors can be undone; it thus encourages exploration of unfamiliar options. The units of reversibility may be a single action, a data entry, or a complete group of actions.

7 Support internal locus of control.
Experienced operators strongly desire the sense that they are in charge of the system and that the system responds to their actions. Design the system to make users the initiators of actions rather than the responders.

8 Reduce short-term memory load.
The limitation of human information processing in short-term memory requires that displays be kept simple, multiple page displays be consolidated, window-motion frequency be reduced, and sufficient training time be allotted for codes, mnemonics, and sequences of actions. 

the rise of the technical VC

Silicon Valley’s first big bang of innovation occurred in 1957, when eight engineers left Shockley Transistor to form FairChild Semiconductor.  Back then, the idea of engineers being entrusted as founders of a business was heretical.  Forty-one firms were asked to invest, but “none of them were interested”, according to Arthur Rock.

The idea that engineers without MBAs can be successful founders has changed, but what about engineers acting as investors?  In my experience, the majority of investment professionals on Sand Hill road are still non-technical.

But that is changing, in two ways.  

First, several young prominent venture capitalists who have technical degrees are rising to the top of their profession.  Folks such as Kevin Efrusy (MSEE and BSEE from Stanford) and Jeremy Levine (CS degree from Duke) are ranked #9 and #10, respectively, on this year’s Midas List of top investors.  And at #1 this year is Jim Breyer, who earned a CS degree from Stanford, and having just turned 50 is still youthful by VC standards.

Secondly, as technical founders have made their fortunes, many of them have joined the investing class.  Marc Andreessen and Reid Hoffman, two successful technical founders turned investors, were the second and third top investors in 2012.

And the Midas List doesn’t cover the funding arena where the influence of technical founders is greatest: angel investing.  Many of the world’s most successful non-professional investors — Jeff Bezos, Max Levchin, Andy Bechtolsheim, Paul Graham, Bill Joy, and Marc Benioff — have, with their spare change and spare time, outperformed entire funds.

Silicon Valley’s venture capital community is undergoing the same “revenge of the nerds” phenomenon that its businesses underwent in the 1960s and 70s.  Technical founders are launching companies, earning returns, and then spotting new start-ups to invest in — increasingly without needing surrogates carrying MBAs.

Or perhaps more accurately, whereas the technical class was previously seen as serving the business class, now it is the business class that serves the technical class.  Mark Zuckerberg’s having a controlling share of Facebook is testament to this new reality.

The rise of the technical VC is part of a larger macro-trend that Marc Andreessen cogently captured in five words: software is eating the world.  

One vertical after another — from media, travel, and (soon I hope) health care and education — is being transformed by information technology.  Those who conceive, develop, and understand software are the new masters of the universe.  And everyone else — lawyers, bankers, janitors — are their servants.

CEOs and VCs are learning to code not because their curiosity inspires it, but because their careers depend on it.

dna dating

A recent start-up, Yoke.me, is attempting to build a better dating engine using Big Data and algorithms.  But what mix of data could best be used to algorithmically identify an optimal mate?  Photos, favorite albums, and religious beliefs are a start.

But how about DNA?

A couple of years ago at SciFoo, Toby Segaran, Meredith Carpenter, and I brainstormed about creating a start-up that would do just this.  We dubbed it GeneHarmony.

Here’s how it would work: to become a member, you submit a saliva sample to our genomics facility, which sequences all of your genetic quirks (since most of us share DNA which is 99.6% similar, we need only sequence the differences).

Read more

the data science debate: domain expertise or machine learning?

(Photo credit:  O’Reilly Radar - See Link to Full Video)

This past Tuesday evening at Strata I moderated an Oxford-Style debate between six of the top data scientists in Silicon Valley and beyond. The motion debated was: 

“In data science, domain expertise is more important than machine learning skill.”

Read more

start-ups belong in cities

Last Saturday, I woke up and walked down to my favorite coffee shop in San Francisco, SightGlass coffee in SoMa.

I met up with a couple of entrepreneurs pitching an amazing idea, and while ordering some mind-buzzingly-good drip coffee, ran into a mentor of mine.

I write this because, while these interactions could have happened in the suburbs of Silicon Valley — whether the Coupa Cafe in Palo Alto or Red Rock in Mountain View — they are quintessentially enabled by four qualities of a city like San Francisco:

  •  neighborhoods that mix commerce and living, that “serve more than one primary function”
  •  blocks that are walkable, short and broken up with alleyways and side streets
  •  buildings which are a diversity of the old and new, luxury and low-rent
  •  people are prevalent and sufficiently concentrated

These four qualities enable the unique vibrancy of urban neighborhoods, and were laid out by Jane Jacobs in her magnum opus “The Death and Life of Great American Cities.”

Read more

ETL: the coal mining of the information age

“If I were starting a NoSQL-in-the-enterprise startup, I would focus on ETL. ETL is a mess, and is a precursor for any fancy uses of data.” - @jaykreps

“@jaykreps ETL is the coal mining of the information age: dirty, important work that fuels the economy.” - @peteskomoroch

One of the largest obstacles facing companies who seek to derive value from data isn’t data’s size.  It’s data’s dirtiness.

It’s been said before: 80% of the effort that goes into a data science project is extracting, transforming, and loading (ETL’ing) data into a system where it can be analyzed.

Read more

why everyone should be a medical data donor

What happens to your medical records when you die?  Gil Elbaz thinks you ought to donate them to science, a thought he shared with a technology audience this past week.

It’s a fascinating idea.  But why wait until you’re dead?  In the age of the quantified self, why shouldn’t you be able to give your DNA sequence, your diet, and your disease diagnoses to science while you’re alive?  Unlike your organs, you can donate your data away and yet still keep it.

We have companies collecting vast swaths of data about our buying, browsing, and clicking habits to sell us more stuff.  But when it comes to understanding what behaviors keep us healthy, it’s a rocky landscape of HIPAA-regulated, technologically-challenged health insurers and providers.  We collect so much data about what makes us click, yet so little about makes us tick.

There are pockets of hope.  Sites such as PatientsLikeMe — which as this writing has 122,640 patients and over a thousand conditions — and Ginger.io are green sprouts in a bottom-up, democratizing data movement for health.

Nearly eight out of ten people on the planet earth now own a mobile phone.  These phones send so-called “heartbeat” data to cell towers every few seconds.  Imagine if, instead, we had the true heartbeat data of the humans carrying those phones?  A simple cardiac signal can betray a host of health issues, from stress and aging to a warning of impending stroke or heart attack.

I know that I’m not alone in being willing to give my data to medical science.  If the Fitbit or Jawbone UP had a checkbox that read “donate my data”, and the receiving institution was a trusted one, it could be the beginning of a valuable data bank.  If the Red Cross can convince us to stick needles in our arms to give blood, certainly we can endure bracelets on our wrists to give data.

lies, damned lies, and social media statistics

Social media statistics — shares, retweets, and likes — reflect content’s value the way a funhouse mirror reflects one’s looks: grotesquely.  As the web lines its halls with social mirrors, these distortions are influencing the content we create and consume.

One need look no further than the headlines at Hacker News for a gallery of the grotesque:  ”N Reasons…”, “Why X is Wrong”, “Free Y”, and “How Z.. Cancer”.  Many of these stories are explicitly crafted to achieve fifteen seconds of fame.

I plead guilty of this seduction — with @jkottke telling me off as proof — because it’s tempting to believe that metrics are an honest measure of value.  They’re not.

Social Media Statistics are Biased

Hacker News readers are not a representative audience. Because of the frenzied frequency with which they flood the voting booths of cyberspace, their influence is outsized — and perversely enough, in inverse proportion to their attention spans.

We need a balance against these biases.  A retweet from @timoreilly means more than one from @lolz69.  Klout has attempted, with some ignominy, to measure online influence. If we weighted retweet counts by influence, we might have a better measure of an article’s impact.

Time matters too. All content is a zero until someone reacts, so we need to gauge the speed of +1s or shares, not just the total.

And positive feedback loops are everywhere.  We end up reading and sharing the same few dozen articles every day, not because these are always the most valuable, but because once they’ve bubbled up into the meme pool, they get recirculated and amplified.

Be a First Follower

The strongest signal of quality should be the content itself, not its number of shares or comments.  If you keep an open mind, you’ll encounter that joy of discovery once so integral to the web.  Lovely gems still lurk out there.  

Being the first follower takes a smidgeon of bravery.  So ignore what other people think and share something no one else has.  You’ll be a democratizing force.

Connect with People, Don’t Collect Them

Few of us share our ideas, photographs, and experiences online solely to collect followers.  We do so to convince, to delight, to connect with people.  

If you’re a creator, never confuse numbers with the value of your creative output.  Resist the urge to chase some earlier success.  If you create something of lasting value, which has staying power after the initial spasms of interest have passed, you will engage with your audience in a way that few metrics reveal.

Blogging to boost your follower count is like launching a start-up to build your bank balance:  it rarely works.  Instead, focus passionately on creating value, and the rest will come.

what to feed the mythical machine learning beast?

One of the holy grails of machine learning is the creation of a system that can “read the web” and learn from it, as Isaac Newton read Euclid’s Elements and taught himself geometry.

Imagine a mythical beast that could speed-read one-hundred million pages per second, consuming every Wikipedia entry, every scientific article on arxiv.org, every out-of-copyright scanned book, and beyond just indexing that information, could actually reason with it.

Read more

We spend more time working than we do on almost any other activity in our lives. People want all that time to mean something.
Next page Something went wrong, try loading again? Loading more posts