"what if objects were actually designed for a bad user experience, instead of a good one? she recalled in a 2018 TED talk. That was my ‘eureka’ moment."
Or, she stumbled upon some article or the very Wikipedia page about it:
"what if objects were actually designed for a bad user experience, instead of a good one? she recalled in a 2018 TED talk. That was my ‘eureka’ moment."
Or, she stumbled upon some article or the very Wikipedia page about it:
Hm? That seems like a different thing?
> Chindōgu (珍道具) is the practice of inventing ingenious everyday gadgets that seem to be ideal solutions to particular problems, but which may cause more problems than they solve.
Nobody would look at a fork with a chain separating the end and the handle, or a toothbrush with a 90 degree bend before the head, or a watering can where the spout bends back over to face the opening, and think it seems like an "ideal solution to a practical problem".
What she's doing is something else entirely: making humorous designs which are obviously, viscerally terribly suited for their purpose. The point is that you look at the item and immediately go, "oh that's horrible".
Regardless, even if Chindōgu actually did describe what she was doing, I don't think "design humorously bad products" is such a unique concept. It seems plausible that two people in history could independently come up with it.
Or you could believe what she said instead of implying that she's lying??