• Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    1 day ago

    To everybody acting like the desire path is the problem:

    1. If the problem for you is that it’s ‘bad’ or ‘illegal’, grow a spine so that when you need to break the law, for something that matters, you can do it with dry pants.
    2. If the design doesn’t take into account how people will interact with it, it’s bad and lazy. Only time it would be acceptable to ‘force’ a way to interact with something is when there are safety concerns, and there are none here.
    3. You are traped in a cage of your own making, break free or perish like the dog you are.
    • slaacaa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 day ago

      Today, I’m astonished to learn about the existence of anti-desire path people based on the comments here

    • Klear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 day ago

      I wanted to say that surely nobody is complaining about desire paths and then I scrolled just a little bit… yikes!

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Seriously. The rabidly boot licking deference obedience and weird conflation if the constructed with the natural/universal is like the worst thing we get from the mostly-christian (anti)intellectual tradition.

      These people are not fit to be adults in a built environment. Their states if mind should not be allowed in a world with such feats of artifice as concrete and movable type.

      • CoffeeVector@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ok being real dude, I don’t think this behavior is a product of “mostly-christian (anti)intellectual tradition,” it’s just the type of people who never grew out of the color-in-the-lines and follow-your-line-buddy stuff from grade school. I don’t think there’s any spectacular political statement to be made here.

        • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          I’ll accept that the corellation is higher up the cognitive chain than that. You may be correct. There’s still a political statement here, but that one may have been off the mark.

    • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not that I have a particular problem with desire paths, but what’s shown in the comic here is an example of how the design changed to take into account how people are interacting with it, and yet it didn’t work out.

      • sqw@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        23 hours ago

        right, it was changed specifically to deny the most popular use. so thats why it doesnt work.

      • Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 day ago

        It didn’t work out because the design didn’t change, it was reinforced. Each attempt failed because there was no actual effort to understand why it’s not working. Like wraping a leaky rusted pipe in ducktape.

          • Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yes? The new path is there because it’s still shorter, people don’t walk in straight lines and sharp angles. That design is still lazy and not thought out

            • TheFogan@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              23 hours ago

              I mean what is a “thought out” path, besides just saying fuck it and paving whole plot. I mean maybe a funnel or something, but again kind of seems likely that we’d wind up with more desire paths forming just differently, maybe people coming from different starting points etc…

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        The only time where the design actually changed, the designer made the point of moving the path away from whhere the desire path was pointing.

        That comic captures it so incredibly well. It’s almost perfect.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Yeah, that person you replied to missed the point entirely, and all the people who up-voted them.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            For me, it was heavy on the “you can’t please everyone” aspect. You try and try, first at enforcing the solution you thought was best, but people have their own problems and their own agenda. Then you try to accommodate that. But you’ll find that there’s always someone whom you can’t please.

            That was my personal take-away.