Think about the way you design. Do you do the controls first, or do you work out the data, the relationships, the rules, then build controls to measure and set those?
Update: Two nice additions to provide some food for your lunchtime (or dinner if you’re in the UK, *VERY* early bfast if in Tokyo ;-) mental fodder,
First from Len Bullard,
Controls are emergent. People don’t get that. As a result, many systems are preconceived notions based on superstitious relationships resulting in wasted motions instead of frugal applications of measured and just-in-time force to encapsulated data.
Second from Piers Hollott,
It is interesting, people seem eager to adopt the principle of “survival of the fittest” (bestest?) while ignoring that in any evolutionary system, “fittest” and “survival” are both very much rooted in context and subject to change.
Disagreement, ambiguity, variability, lie, etc are not bugs, but a feature of the system. Each system which becomes too rigid looses its flexibility and often die. The social agreement makes it happen in a *context* keeping the possibility of an error, a mistake and by it, giving the possibility to fork, evolve, etc.
It’s a question of balance.
1+1 = 2 most of the time, but not necessary in poetry.