Law 7: Emotion
Law 9: Failure
In simplicity we trust.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, July 23rd, 2006 at 4:37 pm and is filed under laws, 8/trust.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
16 Responses to “Law 8: Trust”
Comments Area
NOTE: I reserve the right to edit or delete inappropriate comments. But I'm also a believer in free speech. Keep it simple.
subscribe
your writing about simplicity is impressive to me.
I’m student in the graduate course in korea and
Now I’m study simple about Dgital TV.
People easily Thinkabout Simple But Making Simple is very difficult and It needs insinght.
Always remember that failure is a classic sympton of pushing the envelope. Tedium can be comforting, and sometimes people cling to it. Living in NY, I see that the people who embrace simplicity, are the people who move ahead.
I was recently given your book by a colleague and friend. With some 23 years of my working life in graphic design I found your writing easy to read and entralling from a design point of view. What I had not expected was that it would be of such value to me in my life now as a health and wellbeing practitioner. Whilst realising the obvious (one stated) aim of ‘improved’ not having to mean something added on - I especially found the concept of omakase to be a huge support. To have the confidence to be a Master and to assess my clients’ needs but to pull back from “the enemy of greatness” “when pleasing the customer is the true priority”. In that there is a less is more - more or less? question - the balance of simplicity and complexity in that very idea itself.
A truly inspirational thought and one I shall ponder on more. Thank you.
Thank you for your story Elaine. How to balance confidence and humility — a nice challenge indeed. Best wishes for 07, John
I’ve just finished your impressively precious book.
I love when a book surprise me as well as when there’s someone more important than me that explains so clearly what I feel like a sentiment.
In Italy simplicity is not the first quality to look at, unfortunately, but nevertheless I still believe in a new wave for technology (or, better, for life) where men, and not other things, are the fulcrum… and I believe that through the internet it could be done a lot of work towards this target, that’s what I am also working at day by day.
Thank you for explaining SIMPLICITY in such a SIMPLY, not definitive way.
Thanks Matteo. It’s a somewhat abstract book because I believe in an open approach. Best wishes, John
“In simplicity we trust”
You are very right. Trust wants transparency. Transparency wants simplicity. Simple …and again simple facilitate a true feeling of trust.
I feel that your equations of simplicity are very simple and understandable for all.
Best wishes,
Warm regards & thanks
Ajay Singh Niranjan
http://greathumancapital.wordpress.com/tag/mind/
Simplicity is elementary. Elememntary is simplicity.
Simplicity is elementary. Elementary is simplicity.
To echo Kokomo, I often open my Human Factors presentations with a quote from one of the fathers of the science, Alphonse Chapanis. In 1982 he stated the truism:
“It is easy to make things hard.
It is hard to make things easy.”
I guess, for me, the trust issue in simplicity comes out of my personal definition: Simplicity is achieved when we don’t have to consciously think.
Now, not having to consciously think about something makes simplicity a personal thing. It depends on my background; my experiences; my skills; my knowledge; my context; and my mental model of how the world works. These factors can and do differ between individuals. It can mean that even the most complex tasks are simple - to me.
I don’t even have to think about driving a car or flying an aircraft, yet others may find these to be complex tasks. I don’t have to think about calculating the trajectory or acceleration of an incoming ball to catch it. For me, it’s simple. For a machine, it’s complex.
If something is simple to me, it’s often familiar. If it’s familiar, I can better predict outcomes. If I can better predict outcomes, I can better trust it.
In simplicity we trust.
Some 45 years ago, my shop teacher stressed KISS or “Keep It Simple Stupid”. I’ve tried to do so ever since with various degrees of success. I’ve found that if done correctly, there are two byproducts. The first elegance and the second that it becomes instinctual or as Ash Donaldson said “familiar”.
Can we use this law for “LOVE” ?
You use a heart in front of the rules !
Do you think love can be simple ?
Does simplifying love give more means ?!
…
In love we trust.
I want to google for simple aswers
I want to google and simply gogle
I want to get some weed
Good evening!
First, I’d like to mark that this post is not actually be going to be a comment on this particular law because I just didn’t manage to find the right page for responses on the book in general.
Second, some problems I came across might have been caused by an improper translation of the book as I don’t have the original, in this case I bring my apologise beforehand.
First of all, I have been reading your book for almost 2 weeks because it no way makes an easy reading and I just couldn’t stand reading it longer than 20 minutes at a time. In lots of parts it is made too short because of your attempts of making it easier, as a result half of the laws look unfinished (due to your desire of finishing it earlier?) and sometimes even hard to agree with, lacking proofs and at the same time including too many details in examples provided.
Another thing is that you put too many links for your website into the book trying to shorten it, but in fact it didn’t make it look easier - on the contrary, it made it look scary. Simplicity stands for no artificial frames, as I see it.
Considering your idea about simple devices as tiny devices I can say that I can by no means accept it - most tiny devices do look complicated unlike larger ones for several reasons: they are more convenient, they even look more usable, the more free space is on the surface the simplier the thing looks. That’s why cheap cell phones for kids and elderly people will hardly ever be made smaller (despite nowadays smaller size doesn’t cause serious increase in price).
But although there were some other points I found unecceptable, I’d like to thank you for the book as I found it quite inspiring and informative as my knowledge in design is based on nothing but my own views (I study international economics). So, thank you.