I personally think this kind of shallow criticism is mainly due to the heavy influence of social media. Platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok encourage quick, surface-level reactions, likes, emojis, or short comments, rather than thoughtful, in-depth feedback. People are trained to respond instantly, often prioritizing attention or social approval over meaningful engagement. This environment promotes brief, generalized judgments such as ‘cool’ or ‘not my vibe’ instead of nuanced suggestions or creative insights, which can make it harder for individuals to practice giving or receiving constructive criticism in more substantial contexts.

This made me think of the phrase "with age comes wisdom". I think most people can agree that nowadays, people don't really use this phrase because they don't believe in it. But I think the phrase still holds some truth, as this passage describes. With age (and time), you can gain experience through trial and error in whatever you are doing. Experience cannot be taught; one must go through it themselves to gain the wisdom/knowledge from it.

In one of the other INFO classes I'm taking this quarter, we discussed systems thinking, which involves many independent parts working together to achieve a common goal. I think in the same sense, the use of personas, scenarios, and defining goals is similar to the systems thinking process that I am learning about in the other class.

This reminded me of selecting which kart to use when playing Mario Kart. When you observe the overview for each kart, it shows you the stats for the kart's speed, acceleration, steering, etc. Each kart has different stats across the board, with both strengths and weaknesses. But they are all balanced by their stats. If one kart has really high stats for speed and acceleration, it may not have that high of steering. A kart might even just have average stats across all attributes. Likewise, when talking about desirable and undesirable situations, you must sacrifice some parts to improve other parts; you can't have everything at once.

This paragraph made me realize how simple the title "Designer" is on paper, but the variety of expertise in designing is almost endless. As the text mentions, designing can be as simple as everyday problem-solving, such as rearranging your room, but it can also become extremely complex, like software engineering. I've always naturally associated the term "design" with art-related professions such as interior design, but I see that it stretches far beyond my narrow perceptions.

As I read this description of the human-centered design paradigm, it reminded me of the "scientific method" that I learned about in elementary school. To me, it seems like the scientific process of observing, questioning, coming up with a hypothesis, experimenting, and arriving at a conclusion is very prevalent in this paradigm as well. I know that the scientific method is applicable in many cases, but I find it interesting how even in complex topics such as these, the basis of all these "paradigms" and formulas all wind up back to the same method.