Posts by Cherubin Vanjinath

Ethics

The usage of AI is great in improving productivity, however when asked to help build systems – it takes a very generalist sort of approach.

Although it sounds safe – the problem with taking them live is certain demographics have very different natural tendencies – which if applied wrong it could have massive negative impact on lives of people (classic facebook back in 2013)

Interaction Designers however can use AI to heighten their ethical responsibilities – by giving it prompts to check the work they are taking live and its implicated effects. This way they can use AI systems to recommend ethical routes to take instead – while still helping their companies make profit.

Pace Layers

In IXD, I apply the concept of pace layers to understand how different components of a system evolve at varying rates, which significantly influences the design lifecycle.

Mapping these layers to interaction design, I consider:

  1. Fashion/Art (Fast Layer): This encompasses rapidly changing design trends, aesthetics, and user interface elements. Staying attuned to emerging styles ensures that products remain visually appealing and relevant.
  2. Commerce (Fast, but slower than Fashion): This layer involves market demands and business models, which evolve to meet consumer needs and economic shifts. Aligning design work with current market trends ensures commercial viability.
  3. Infrastructure (Moderate Layer): This includes the underlying technologies and platforms that support design implementations. Changes here occur more slowly, as they require significant investment and development time. Considering the stability and scalability of these technologies is crucial.
  4. Governance (Slow Layer): This pertains to regulations, standards, and ethical guidelines that govern design practices. Changes are infrequent but have substantial impact. Ensuring compliance with these standards maintains integrity and user trust.
  5. Culture (Slower Layer): This reflects societal values, user behaviors, and expectations, which evolve gradually. Understanding cultural contexts is essential for creating designs that resonate with users on a deeper level.
  6. Nature (Slowest Layer): This represents fundamental human behaviors and cognitive processes, which change very slowly over time. Aligning designs with these innate human factors ensures intuitiveness and accessibility.

Webb 2-3

When I think about Web 2.0, it feels like the internet’s “teenage years”—a time when everything became more interactive, social, and alive. Before Web 2.0, the web was mostly static, where people just read information or clicked links. But Web 2.0 flipped the script, turning the internet into a platform where we could create, share, and actually shape the web ourselves.

With Web 2.0, user-generated content became a thing. Platforms like YouTube and blogs let anyone with an internet connection post their ideas, videos, or opinions. Suddenly, people weren’t just spectators; they were creators. At the same time, social media exploded. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter made interacting online feel real—liking posts, sharing updates, and connecting with friends wasn’t just a novelty; it became a habit.

But what really made Web 2.0 special was how seamless everything started to feel. Features like Google’s auto-updating inbox and drag-and-drop interfaces showed that the web could be dynamic. We didn’t need to refresh the page or wait forever for things to load. It was also personal. Platforms started suggesting content based on what we liked, making the web feel tailored to each of us.

Now, the interactions we have are way beyond what Web 2.0 imagined. Instead of centralized platforms controlling everything, decentralization is taking hold through blockchain and dApps. With AI, content feels smarter, and with AR and VR, interactions are moving into immersive 3D spaces. Web 2.0 gave us social media and collaboration tools, but today, the web is about control, immersion, and intelligence.

IPOD aftermath

I’ve learned that creating great designs isn’t just about making something look cool or functional—it’s about making it fit seamlessly into a larger system. When I look at the iPod and iPhone, I see two perfect examples of how design can go beyond a single product and connect with an entire ecosystem to make users’ lives easier.

The iPod wasn’t just a music player. It was a device that worked effortlessly with iTunes to let people sync their music, playlists, and preferences. It didn’t make you feel like you were figuring out complicated tech; it just worked. Then came the iPhone, which took this idea even further. It wasn’t just a phone—it became part of a system that included the App Store, Macs, iPads, and eventually even your home with things like HomeKit. Apple made sure every piece of the puzzle fit together, so the experience felt natural no matter what you were doing.

As a student, this teaches me an important lesson: our designs can’t exist in isolation. People don’t just use one device or one app; they live in an interconnected world. Whether it’s designing an app or a new tool, I need to think about how it will work with other systems and adapt to different contexts. The iPod and iPhone didn’t just change technology—they showed us that compatibility isn’t just a feature, it’s a necessity. That’s a mindset I want to take into every project I work on.

Do Design Patterns Stifle Creativity ?

As an intern, I’ve noticed that design systems aren’t just about following strict rules. They help teams stay consistent and organized, which is especially helpful when working with many people or across different products. For a company, design systems ensure that everything has a unified look and feel, which is great for users because they know what to expect across the brand’s apps or websites.

A design system also speeds up the design process. Instead of creating buttons, colors, or layouts from scratch every time, designers can use pre-made components and focus on bigger, more creative ideas. For me, it’s exciting to see how having a strong design system means we don’t have to worry about reinventing the basics. It’s like having a well-stocked toolkit—everything you need is there, so you’re free to experiment and innovate.

While some might think design systems limit creativity, I see it as the opposite. They provide a foundation that lets designers think beyond the basics.

What caused the transition from Web design to User Experience Design?

The shift from Web Design to User Experience (UX) Design is something I’ve seen and felt firsthand in my work. Early web design was pretty simple—it was all about making things look good, organizing content in a way that caught the eye. But as digital products grew more complex, it became clear that a website wasn’t just a “place” anymore; it was an experience. Aesthetics alone didn’t cut it. We needed to think about how people felt using our sites, what they were trying to do, and how we could make it easier for them.

One huge factor driving this shift was the rise of mobile. Suddenly, people were using devices of all shapes and sizes, and traditional web layouts started to break down.

This forced us to design with more flexibility and empathy for different types of users. The experience couldn’t just look good on a desktop; it had to be seamless on every device.

UX brought in a whole new mindset. It wasn’t just about how things looked but about how they worked—and more importantly, how they worked for the person using them. We started focusing on user flows, usability testing, and really understanding user pain points.

Analytics played a role, too. We had real data on user behavior, which allowed us to make changes based on actual needs, not just assumptions.

Internet & Government

ho should invent new technology—governments, corporations, or open-source communities? Each has unique strengths, but also limitations.

Historically, governments have pioneered foundational technology. The internet and GPS, among other breakthroughs, were born from government funding, where long-term vision allows for high-risk projects without the pressure of immediate returns. However, governments are often slow-moving and bureaucratic, which can stifle innovation.

Corporations, by contrast, excel at taking technology mainstream. They can rapidly scale products, leveraging competition to improve quality and reach. However, their focus on profitability means innovation is often restricted to what drives revenue. Corporations can lock down technology with patents, creating monopolies and restricting broader access.

Open-source communities offer an entirely different approach. Built by passionate individuals, they emphasize collaboration, transparency, and accessibility. Open-source has given us Linux, Firefox, and many foundational internet tools. Yet, these projects often lack sustainable funding, making it challenging to support large-scale or long-term development.

In reality, no single sector should bear the full responsibility. Governments are ideal for funding high-risk, long-term projects; corporations for scaling and commercializing; and open-source communities for transparency and collaboration. Together, they create a balance that drives technology forward in ways that are both innovative and accessible.

In my opinion, corps and open source should rule – where the governement plays a helping hand in taking it to scale – (by enabling commoners)

GUI Yesterday.

The early days of computers like the Macintosh and Windows, graphical user interfaces (GUIs) were very basic. The screens small, resolutions low, and simple, boxy windows, menus, and icons. You would use a mouse and keyboard to click on things and type commands. The design was limited by the technology of the time, so everything was flat, without much color or detail.

The evolution of GUIs became much more visually appealing and functional in decades to come. Now, we have high-resolution displays with vibrant colors and detailed designs. The look of icons and windows has become simpler and cleaner, but more modern and responsive.

Today, we interact with devices not just using a mouse and keyboard, but also by touching the screen, swiping, or even talking to them. Voice commands through digital assistants like Siri or Alexa have become common, and some devices even recognise gestures in the air. (thank you Graham)

Even though the basic idea of a GUI—clicking icons and using windows—has stayed the same, the ways we interact with computers have expanded.Our devices are faster, more intuitive, and work across different devices like phones, tablets, and computers.

The next stride in advancement is going to be voice and chat integration – where you will have a more life-like (human) experience with the computer, which understands your needs better and solves problems from ur shoes.

xerox PARC

The Xerox Star, introduced in 1981, marked a turning point in the history of computing, laying the groundwork for how we interact with personal computers today. Although it wasn’t a commercial success, its influence reshaped the direction of computer design and user interfaces, leaving a legacy that would be felt for decades.

In addition to the GUI, the Xerox Star introduced the concept of WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get), this allowed us to see on screens how documents would appear once printed. This innovation laid the foundation for modern word processing and desktop publishing, making tools like Microsoft Word and Adobe PageMaker possible.

PS, without this, we have no Apple or Innovative technology

NO IXD without ADA (ix) and Lillian (d)

Ada Lovelace is one of the most important people in IXD because she helped formulate to bring the “IX” in ixd to life. 

As someone who believed that compute was more than just numbers, she helped progress the complex systems thinking to adopt symbols, music, art and other areas of science. 

Her keen interest pushed the boundaries in data processing, cryptography but most importantly, AGI (not in those exact words) 

Without these algebraic computations, it would be impossible for us to run our designs on Figma and bring them to web versions in real time, In real life. 

Lillian Gilberth deserves huge praise in terms of bringing the D to “IXD”, simply because she helped pioneer and innovate in ergonomic and functional design which has helped us propel the way we think of life. 

Her keen attention into (human centred design) allows people today to design keeping in mind various stakeholders as well as motivate them to use it with ease due to the psychology behind it.

Without these two, we might not have IX D.

DoorDash v Mayan hieroglyphs

What this communicates today is a simple, functional idea—your delivery address or place of residence. What needs to be learned here is that the house is used as a quick, recognizable symbol for home or location. Unlike its ancient counterparts, this modern icon is straightforward and minimalist, designed purely for function without cultural depth. It uses familiar elements like a roof and walls to signify a home, providing users with an easy and universal representation of a delivery destination.
This is the house symbol, used over centuries ago. What this communicated back in the day was – place of stay and shelter. What needs to be learned here is that house – not only means residence, but a place of belonging where people from similar lineage stayed. The Mayan symbol is much more complex to understand at first glance, but as you look deeper you can understand that these are icons which are based out of specific homes used by the Mayans – as it shows the roof, the doors, the windows etc.
What this communicates today is your personal profile, representing an individual user’s identity within the app. What needs to be learned here is that this symbol is a simplified version of a human figure, designed for quick recognition. Unlike ancient representations of people, this icon is minimalistic and functional, focusing only on the concept of a single user. It doesn’t communicate deeper details like status or lineage—just the basic idea of an individual profile, allowing users to easily access their account settings and personal data.
The person symbol “Winik” signifies a cultural depiction and representation of people that belong to their specific culture. Upon study, I learnt that the glyph changes according to specific person it represents, which helps determine their age, status and rank. The metaphoric representation here is definitely more complex as it uses symbols from the cloud, eye and other glyphs, which signifies that the person is more than a divine and spiritual being.

Cherubin