How Designers Destroyed the World - Mike Monteiro, at USI

[@antipusrises]

Montiero is the single greatest living voice in design. I’ve been following him for years, but this talk will be his lasting achievement.

[@adamnelsen3698]

Gotta be a language barrier here. This talk was POWERFUL and MEANINGFUL. This crowd, not so much. :(

[@sheriffderek]

Way to hang in there and get it done, Mike. That crowd was rough.

[@bigro4444]

Tough crowd. They were not feeling the punchlines.

[@gabyu]

+ROBERTO OROZCO French. English is hard.

[@frankleespeaking2282]

Don't blame the crowd when the speaker is humorless and petulant.

[@faro_inc]

Frank Lee Speaking I really think that isn't the objective to be warm and cute when the main subject is too serious.

[@TaskerTech]

They are wearing ties gosh what can expect..

[@plain-bagel]

​@@frankleespeaking2282 Imagine watching a talk that, among other things, discusses the obvious disregard big tech has towards individual privacy and lashing out at the speaker. Good grief.

[@sinlokemp]

One laid back crowd! Great lecture!

[@nonash1702]

The weirdest thing was that noone raised a hand when he asked if they know Victor Papanek. The title of the lecture itself speaks of Papanek's phrase "There are professions more harmful than industrial design, but a very few of them."

[@jordanzish]

Woah, a Mike Monteiro talk I didn't know existed? I must have been sleeping.

[@AA-lq5pu]

I personally refuse to design anything that will promote something which goes against my ethics code. My feeling of self worth is far more important to me than the money.

[@chubbec]

I find it strange how this can't be the same for everyone. The world would certainly be a better place, and isn't that what everyone wants even if you love money? I remember when I was young, around 16. Along with the naivety, I wasn't very smart and lived in a small town with little options in terms of career path. I wanted to apply for an apprenticeship one day, it was good pay and had good prospects. It was entry level but was essentially building missiles, although it wasn't framed that way - projectile technician and other jargon. "How cool!" I thought. I showed dad the application form, and vividly remember him saying to me "you don't want to build things that kill people" and that's all I needed to hear...

[@dtkedtyjrtyj]

@@chubbec Some people don't see anything wrong with killing people in self defense, or making cakes for gay marrages, or being telemarketers or whatever else someone might think is immoral; so even if noone does anything they personally think is immoral, things _you_ think are immoral would still be done.

[@chubbec]

@@dtkedtyjrtyj I understand how moral code can be adapted to ones personal beliefs but in terms of measuring it, ethics has a pretty rigid definition. The stuff you're talking is boardering on deconstruction and existential nihilism which solves nothing going forward. Are you a designer?

[@dtkedtyjrtyj]

@@chubbec "Ethics" is the application of a moral code; I don't know what you mean by it being rigid. It would be better if everyone had a developed moral code to follow, even if _I_ didn't agree with them. Unfortunately a lot of people don't even have that. For instance, when I was young I almost became a telemarketer. And it was luck, not intent that stopped me. I would gladly design missiles though. We are all different. I am a web developer, not a "designer". Design; UX and UI is important thought and we don't have anyone dedicated to it, so I suppose I should say I dabble in it.

[@chubbec]

​@@dtkedtyjrtyj It's rigid in definition of causing harm the environment or others. Whether that person is a paedophile or doctor is besides the point. Would that not be a developed moral code? ^ - I think it is more black and white than you think when you look at it objectively on universal terms.

[@lilybu5199]

Amazing speaker. Great points that need to be shared.

[@chubbec]

Interesting topic of conversation. I understand this talk is aimed within a certain area but you can apply this to all job roles and life. Most people just see themselves as Graphic Designers, making posters and other shit just to get by, so this could be quite an extreme view of things. In terms of actual lives, life and death - we are just designers. Design is a privileged discipline that thinks itself far more clever than what it is - we borrow from other subjects to create. We're experts in nothing other than the projection of information supplied by others.

[@stevenfleck1584]

The funny thing is that facebook doesn't hire designers to design its site, I don't think, maybe once in a while to design memes, but they just use coders for everything I would imagine, like most large websites. The only time they would hire designers is for layout.

[@kylemthunder]

"If you're affecting how a product works in any way whatsoever, you're designing. For example, a product manager who allocates half the resources your team requested to finish a project is most definitely having an impact on the final design." - Mike Monteiro, Ruined By Design Mike argues that at every stage of the process, those who are involved in the final product are part of the design process and are in turn, designers. If you have the ability to identify a part of what you are designing is harmful to other people then it is your responsibility to object and try and bring about the change that stops the harm. If you've not read or listened to "Ruined by Design" then I highly recommend it. Great book.

[@youngzm]

Jesus christ that audience was dead. A little bit of enthusiasm would be great. While I agree with Mike mostly I find it also difficult to side myself with him with success/opportunity earlier on in one's career. I don't necessarily think it takes 10 years of experience to gain full control of your professional voice and to succeed in places you want/ need to, but I don't think that is a reality for 90% of the workforce. A lot of us are actively engaged in environmentally damaging acts (package design, direct mail), poor marketing choices (eg. poor copy, image editing or selection) and our hands are tied up to the point of striving to create change in ways we can or flat out exiting the company. We can opt to push for environmentally friendly production methods, more ethical and accessible design, but what we can't do is accomplish any of what he speaks of without some form of financial support or authority. This isn't to say you can't stand up to immoral requests or lead through an education, but at the end of the day, some expectation of reality and thus compromise is also a must. This sort of try but concede/ compromise in most of our work is an unfortunate reality and one without the specific luxury of being able to stand up, exclaim you're wrong to your boss and expect to have a desk the next morning. Even if it's what needs to happen, an overwhelming majority of workplaces and indeed, individuals are not receptive to this sort of behaviour. I might be wrong, but it's a luxury we earn through working, not through ideology or best intent. Regardless, I still value the sentiments and hope that I'm able to work hard enough and be wise enough to exact control so that I may be proud of my work and my contributions to society.

[@frankleespeaking2282]

Don't blame the crowd when the speaker is humorless and petulant.

[@JorgeVerlindoVerlindoCom]

Great lecture!

[@cosmasindico]

Love the discussion, and I think he's correctly diagnosed the problem but his solution is dead wrong. The problem is not that designers are neglectful gatekeepers, it's that they are overzealous gatekeepers or gatekeepers at all. You can not make an idiot proof box because the world just keeps turning out better idiots. You can not design that away. This is a very top-down worldview and it's fundamentally flawed. We should not be trying to harden institutions and practices, we should be trying to educate and harden consumers and users. You can't stop the stove from being hot, you can only teach people not to touch it. Design can help but design needs fewer gatekeepers and more transparency. This views designers as a kind of priesthood of the masses. That's a reasonable worldview for someone ensconced in that profession, but remember, 200 years ago there were no designers, just craftsmen. Design is a second order phenomenon or epiphenomenon of the economies of scale. Design was once in the hands of every individual craftsmen, every cabinetmaker, printer, seamstress, etc. and every town had hundreds of them. Along came the industrial revolution and suddenly you needed a designer because no one in the factory was responsible for that chair or fabric, the designer was, and that moved design away from the many, away from the craftsmen, to the few, the designers. But that may not be true forever. New technologies are moving towards individual creation and customization. In 200 years the designer may be relic of the past and design will return to thousands of individual craftsmen. "Design" as a profession, at least as we understand it, didn't exist 200 years ago and it may not exist 200 years from now.

[@adityar728]

Amazing talk, got me goosebumps.

[@JoshuaEliGilley]

real talk...amazing shit!!

[@usievents]

+Joshua Gilley happy to read this !

[@helensimmons]

Fabulous talk I’m making all of the exclamations the audience did not

[@giuseppeorellana2172]

x2

[@DTMfun]

Inspiring speech

[@JoseArias-ik7pb]

This was really motivating and powerful

[@ElonPete]

I can not understate the impact this video had on me when I first heard it over a decade ago. The only thing that’s changed is FB’s UI

[@trevorblackman2039]

Where can I watch a video on design principals, not ethics?

[@Slava-om1sz]

I like Mike. Especially for the reasons he was a "bad employee". I'd hire him.

[@giuseppeorellana2172]

Damn, that felt personal. Great lecture!

[@Eepsheep]

Watching the facebook segment today - after watching the hearings - is quite eye-opening.

[@roadsign289]

this is so awesome

[@adi26top]

Agreed & Great learning to become a responsible designer

[@M9Diry]

Important message but delivered in a holier than thou way... "I have re-educate clients who've been scorned by poor designers in the past"... = "I am the man and you are the puppet"

[@radi.inkrush]

the crowd is so bored. his speech fell a bit flat.

[@AlexKarasev]

Yup. They're on a different level of the Maslow's pyramid.

[@wirelesmike73]

This is the kind of honest, ethical, and moral approach that should be brought to the development of AI... But, it's not.

[@bslgrafix]

Dammit when don't you come to TX get some shit going ... great lecture.

[@faceman501]

Mike Monteiro: it's not capitalism, it's you.

[@dosesandmimoses]

Bravo!

[@MECKENICALROBOT]

Preach!!!!

[@gabyu]

@3:48 French people cannot read French and English. LOL

[@NoGoodHandlesComingToMind]

I think this lecture had a nice idea but shouldn't have had the Facebook case... he could've gone off the Victor Papanex quote and shortened this whole thing to 15 minutes. It would have been more concise. Additionally, Monteiro's whole _shtick_ , or _routine_ gets tiresome, and sounds like an inverted Shepard Tone after the 20 minute mark.

[@Jalvoo]

The designer with the least ego:

[@moojoodesigns]

Wow. And yes.

[@krisdavis01]

Another title could have been “Mike Montero building horrible narratives and blaming people for unintended consequences that in their time could not have been accounted for” I love the sentiment of empowerment, considering how much impact designers have and the criticism of technology. The narrative however is extremely poor.

[@antquinonez]

Hi, it's me again. This crowd was god damn pathetic. Bad design (everything is designed, don't you know?) is everywhere. It costs me in having to replace ALL my large appliances every few years. Have the courage to tell Facebook to screw off when they come knocking. I did.

[@fluff_thorrent]

Fuck yeah!

[@antquinonez]

Oh god. This is why designers suck so bad. Good design barely exists.

[@dtkedtyjrtyj]

While I agree with the general point: take responsiblility for your work; those were some _godawful_ examples. The lesbian lying to her parents; sure a bug in Facebook outed her, but mistakes will happen. It was inevitable. She is an adult woman, if it was that important maybe she shouldn't have put herself in a global search engine. (Privacy settings, bah. If it's online it's public. It's only a question of effort.) A seach engine listing gay people in Tehran. Don't you think that maybe if you are gay and living in Tehran , you are aware of the risks of entering that information into a search engine? They're adults; take some responsibility for _yourself_. Thirty-six different iPhone cases. Yes; we _do_ need that. People are willing to pay for them; money they have _earned_ with their time. Who are you to say that they may not spend that on a nice case for their phone? Take responsibility for your work, yes, but let other people take responsibility as well. Remember that everything will be less than perfect. Don't use _awful, awful_ examples.

[@frankleespeaking2282]

Monteiro is awful, period.

[@JimGriesemer]

What a heartless response on what happened to her. It was not a bug. It was a flawed design that misled her effectively ruining her life.

[@chubbec]

Disagree, personal responsibility is void if platform isn't doing the readtangibleIt's common knowledge that there are problems with these platforms. Surely you can see that?

[@dtkedtyjrtyj]

@@chubbec Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? I can't tell.What is "readtangible" and how could that possibly void personal responsibility? Anyway, yes there are problems with _all_ platforms, that is why you should take personal responsibility and _not_ publish secrets you desperately want to keep on the internet.

[@chubbec]

@@dtkedtyjrtyj I don't know what's going on some of my comments are getting combined with past comments or completely vanishing when I refresh lol. I cba writing original point - but when you say that there are problems with all platforms and that is why you should take responsibility, are you implying that problems with platforms are always going to exist so we shouldn't correct them or even have better foundations to build on? Ethical design would and could solve this, to the point of original video. I get what you mean but the way I see it, platformpubliclyfeasibleWhoops ended up writing a bit...

[@johnnnyfoley]

Good content, although the speaker is about as engaging as watching a puddle evaporate

[@thebluedot4728]

in other words do not use facebook

[@derpauloferreira]

👏👏👏

[@thebluedot4728]

imagine being in an abusive relationship and on facebook, bad idea

[@thebabscast5154]

Woke

[@guidewired]

I like this kid

[@PeterMMMMM]

He gave an awesome talk. Just a bit cringy when his style borders on megachurch / tele-evengelist.

[@frankleespeaking2282]

Awful.

[@JimGriesemer]

Not once have you addressed the substance of what Mike presented. Instead of only personally attacking Mike, make a counterargument.