You could actually make some parallels, if you tried, based on an evaluation of quality. Because there are insights to be found in the field of film design, direction, art, immersion, fantasy, predictability, surprise, delight, emotional response; you name it. You could do that, and it would be valid. Contrived and hyped, maybe, but valid and probably even useful, because analogies are useful—in fact there are entire studies done that say that analogy is basically the way we take in new information best.
Instead, you did nothing, which is worth exactly nothing, and the worst part, you'll be rewarded for it because of some anti-pop-culture meme-train that enjoys people who hate things, making your post not only nothing, but nothing that's amplified. So it is, in fact, worse than nothing.
We have come to a weird point in the evolution of the web when people will sincerely say something like, "I was pleasantly surprised to click on that ridiculous link and find no actual content."
However, I stress seeing medium.com links. I really like how HN puts the domain after a link, and having so many and so varied articles listed under the "medium.com" umbrella is irritating when the quality is, to put it mildly, rather mixed.
There are a few writers on there I wish would choose to publish on their own space, rather than in this - ahem - "medium".
I understand, but OTOH I was actually happy finding out this wasn't a real article when opening it in twitter, and thought some HNers would appreciate the feeling as well.
Let's talk about the awesomeness of HBO's DVDs. They get so many things right. For each episode, there is usually a "previously on" and a summary. And thank sweet-lord-baby-jesus, when you start and episode and hit the "next chapter" button, it skips right to the end of the opening credits. Why all DVDs aren't this way, I don't know. The GOT DVDs are especially cool because each disc in the whole set includes a full "who's who' guide to Westeros.
This could have been a great article about drawing lessons in design and usability from unusual forms of media and unconventional user experiences. Or about when and where it is appropriate to experiment and deviate from established norms, and how best to do so without sacrificing standards and quality.
Instead, it's an embittered response to a question I never asked in the first place.
You could actually make some parallels, if you tried, based on an evaluation of quality. Because there are insights to be found in the field of film design, direction, art, immersion, fantasy, predictability, surprise, delight, emotional response; you name it. You could do that, and it would be valid. Contrived and hyped, maybe, but valid and probably even useful, because analogies are useful—in fact there are entire studies done that say that analogy is basically the way we take in new information best.
Instead, you did nothing, which is worth exactly nothing, and the worst part, you'll be rewarded for it because of some anti-pop-culture meme-train that enjoys people who hate things, making your post not only nothing, but nothing that's amplified. So it is, in fact, worse than nothing.
Thanks for nothing.