Development of cross-platform software & interactive apps. Coder of Vibes Builder of MVP's. Professional Prompter. A bit of a Crypto Bro'
Byron Bay, New South Wales
Joined January 2013
- Tweets1.9K
- Following2.1K
- Followers807
- Likes5.3K
deprogram.sol retweeted
This has been said a thousand times before, but allow me to add my own voice: the era of humans writing code is over. Disturbing for those of us who identify as SWEs, but no less true. That's not to say SWEs don't have work to do, but writing syntax directly is not it.
deprogram.sol retweeted
Getting to great design isn’t about narrowing your focus onto one tiny problem or building yet another “purpose‑built” tool. It’s about learning to see through the surface and recognize the truths underneath everything we do – the same patterns, the same flows, the same ideas repeated across different tools and teams.
For years, our tools have siloed us. Each one arrives with a strong opinion about how work “should” be done. “This is a project, so it must go through these stages.” “This is design, so it must be framed and canvas.” “This is engineering, so it must be elusive.” The tools became selfish. They stopped being mirrors for how we think and started dictating how we’re allowed to think. You have your way of working, your way of seeing, but you’re forced to pick one box, one stack, one workflow.
Craft is not just animation, motion, or detail. Craft is the coherence of the entire system – how ideas move from a note to a sketch to a prototype to a running product, how teams move from chaos to clarity without feeling like they need to change who they are just to fit into a tool.
Great tools should unify, not fragment. They should connect the designer’s canvas with the builder’s editor, connect the writer’s outline with the team’s roadmap, and let patterns repeat and evolve across everything instead of trapping them in separate silos.
Designers can build. Builders can design. The old line between “design tools” and “dev tools” is an artifact of the software we had, not the people we are.
Let the dreamers build. Let the builders dream. Give people systems that get out of the way, that adapt to how they think, that make it feel natural to go from idea to reality without asking for permission at every step.
That’s the future that matters – not more purpose‑built boxes, but one coherent universe where all the pieces finally talk to each other, and you get to be your whole self while you work.
Whenever a new design to code tool comes around, people get excited. It’s considered the holy grail of design. You can now design with code. This is the final evolution.
But I don’t agree. It’s only the holy grail if you value output higher than the process of design.
Whenever a designer becomes more of a builder, some idealism and creativity dies. Not because building is bad, but because you start out including constraints earlier in the process than they should.
I’m one that very much thinks design is ultimately what is shipped. But before it shipped, there is a lot of stages that don’t benefit from code or some implementation constraints.
In architecture, a lot of the best work is started with sketches and some of the best architects still draw by hand. People forget that the creative process is not about tools. It’s about forming a vision, and then translating that vision into some form. You can use various tools as part of the process, but designers job is really communicating that vision.
Once you become the architect and the builder, or the designer and the developer, you start making more conservative bets. You gravitate to what you already know is feasible or supported. You make smaller iterations. You stop dreaming something big. This is not design.
Designers, don’t do that. Your job is to imagine the future, and sometimes code and convention gets in the way. Use tools. Understand the domain. Get close to the medium.
But don’t lose your greatest strength ability to dream. Work with engineers to realize those dreams.
Designing in code is just a path to local maxima and ruin.
deprogram.sol retweeted
GM
Our virtual space for Tezos artists and non digital art Byron Bay, is growing and has a new group of professional collaborators. createart.studio, @_deprogram_ , @paul_g_brown + Louis Ponte, at aerial-perspectives.au
deprogram.sol retweeted
Don’t fuck with the stones man they have mystical powers hope they all wake up tmoz and are all orange toads
deprogram.sol retweeted
The r1 rabbit working on IOS 👀
This app utilizes device time, battery life, haptic touch, camera and more. Built in just a few hours and working as a PWA, IOS and Android (see thread)
This demo was built in @FlutterDev with @FlutterFlow
deprogram.sol retweeted
🚀 Something big is coming to the world of video entertainment! YUVU's waitlist is live - where AI makes you the creator. Ready for AI-driven storytelling? Join now at yuvu.ai #YUVULaunch #AIStorytelling #ai #entertainment
deprogram.sol retweeted
Jeff Bezos: “Any high-performing organization has to have mechanisms and a culture that supports truth telling”
As Jeff explains in the clip below:
“Truths often don’t want to be heard. Important truths can be uncomfortable, awkward, exhausting, challenging. They can make people defensive, even if that’s not the intent. But any high-performing organization—whether it’s a sports team, a business, a political organization, or activist group—has to have mechanisms and a culture that supports truth telling.”
And one of the things you have to do to support this kind of culture is talk about it:
“You have to talk about the fact that it takes energy to do that. And you have to remind people that it’s ok that it’s uncomfortable. You have to literally tell people: it’s not what we’re designed to do as humans… we mostly survive by being social animals—cordial and cooperative.”
He continues:
“You also want to set up your culture so that the most junior person can overrule the most senior person.”
And in every meeting Jeff attends, he always speaks last:
“I know from experience that if I speak first, even very strong-willed, highly-intelligent participants of that meeting will [wonder if their ideas are incorrect because they’re different from Jeff’s]… Ideally you try to have the most junior go first and then go in order of seniority so that you can hear everyone’s opinion in an unfiltered way… Because we really do change our opinions—if somebody you really respect says something, it makes you change your mind a little.”
Jeff also points out that a lot of the most powerful truths aren’t always based on data—they turn out to be hunches, are based on anecdotes, or are intuition-based:
“You may feel yourself leaning in. It may resonate with a set of anecdotes you have. And then you may be able to say: ‘something about that feels right. Let’s go collect some data on that and try to see if we can know if it’s right.’”
And lastly he discusses fighting inherent biases. For example, most companies usually have an optimism bias. As Jeff explains:
“If there are two interpretations of a new set of data—one is happy and the other is unhappy—it’s a little dangerous to jump to the conclusion that the happy interpretation is right. You may want to compensate for that human bias of trying to find the silver lining and say ‘that might be good, but I’m gonna go with it’s bad for now until we’re sure.’”
