Baukunst: The Art of Building
Panic - Loud stories. Exceptional craft.
Dylan Brouwer Design
How to give constructive design feedback over email | by Julius Tarng | Medium
Dayrate
ShareDrop - AirDrop alternative on the web
Wormhole - Simple, private file sharing
Back to the Future of Twitter – Stratechery by Ben Thompson
This is all build-up to my proposal for what Musk — or any other bidder for Twitter, for that matter — ought to do with a newly private Twitter.
First, Twitter’s current fully integrated model is a financial failure.
Second, Twitter’s social graph is extremely valuable.
Third, Twitter’s cultural impact is very large, and very controversial.
Given this, Musk (who I will use as a stand-in for any future CEO of Twitter) should start by splitting Twitter into two companies.
One company would be the core Twitter service, including the social graph.
The other company would be all of the Twitter apps and the advertising business.
TwitterServiceCo would open up its API to any other company that might be interested in building their own client experience; each company would:
Pay for the right to get access to the Twitter service and social graph.
Monetize in whatever way they see fit (i.e. they could pursue a subscription model).
Implement their own moderation policy.
This last point would cut a whole host of Gordian Knots:
A truly open TwitterServiceCo has the potential to be a new protocol for the Internet — the notifications and identity protocol; unlike every other protocol, though, this one would be owned by a private company. That would be insanely valuable, but it is a value that will never be realized as long as Twitter is a public company led by a weak CEO and ineffective board driving an integrated business predicated on a business model that doesn’t work.
Twitter’s Reluctance
Building Fluid Interfaces. How to create natural gestures and… | by Nathan Gitter | Medium
Success and Failure at Pebble. We launched Pebble on Kickstarter 10… | by Eric Migicovsky | Apr, 2022 | Medium
Exporter
Uncharted Review: Tom Holland Stars in a Bland Video Game Movie | IndieWire
All an “Uncharted” movie had to accomplish — all that it possibly could accomplish — was to capture the glint and derring-do that helped the series port the spirit of Indiana Jones into the modern world. And while it’s true that the best moments of Ruben Fleischer’s thoroughly mediocre (if not unpleasant) adaptation manage to achieve that goal for three or four entire seconds at a time, this generic multiplex adventure falls so far short of its source material because it fails in the areas where history says it should have been able to exceed it. The areas where movies have traditionally had the upper hand over video games: Characters. Personality. Humor. Humanity! You know, the things that films get for free, and video games have to create through witchcraft. The same things that someone up the ladder decided to leave behind when they took a solid-gold brand like “Uncharted” and turned it into an IMAX-sized chunk of cubic zirconia, resulting in a movie that isn’t just less playable than the game on which it’s based, but less watchable too.
FAFSA for Grad School: What’s Different—and What’s Not
Stafford Loans for Students
Find Scholarships for College for FREE | Fastweb
UNIGO - Find Over 3.6M Scholarships & Grants
Faculty | Human-Computer Interaction Institute
How to Get a Job at Spotify Design
Russian Atrocities in Bucha, Ukraine, Comes From Military Culture
Why it's a bad idea for startups to make their branding distinctive
Reasonable Colors
Making the internet your own
Design in the Real World
The 2022 Instagram Trend Report
The art of writing funding applications
XXIX — Studio
INDEX
SANCTU COMPU - The Safest Place on Earth.
Universal Everything / Collective
Sketchfab - The best 3D viewer on the web