tools for ideation are frequently distinct from tools for implementation, often lacking the capability to seamlessly transfer data between them
this is often seen in common design tools; is it a product of capitalism? Is the market afraid of standardization? In the transfer of one product to another?
This perpetuates seeing the “support staff” as merely a resource (rather than central to the creative process), whose work can be replaced.
designs solely generated by models are not informed by the complex human interaction in the design process, by designers.
However, not many analytical resources exist for understanding the broader historical and theoretical underpinnings of creative computing
The main challenge for the activity view is finding a representative set of users for whom the tool is designed.
how can one design tools when it is based on isolated moments of interaction (i.e in user studies, etc) when it ignores broader contexts of history and environment?