If you or your friends are looking for someone for help, or just chat general design with, I have opened some slots on my @ADPList profile (link in my bio). Feel free to book a slot and I'd be happy to help! 🙌 Cheers.

hot take: designers often feel like they have to defend every single choice they make, as if they're constantly on trial. that's because design is so visual—anyone can glance at it and throw out opinions, even if those opinions are vague or come from someone without much expertise. for instance, a non-designer might casually say, "this color feels off," without backing it up or offering a real alternative. the bar for giving feedback is incredibly low; you don't need deep knowledge to chime in. now, compare that to engineering: folks don't usually drop random technical suggestions unless they actually understand the code. instead, they'd point out a specific issue, like "clicking this button triggers an error." it's straightforward and functional, not just a gut reaction like "this code seems weird." but here's where things get imbalanced: when someone hits a designer with that low-effort feedback, the expectation for the designer's reply is surprisingly high. if someone asks, "why this layout here?" answering "after a few iterations this one felt right" rarely satisfies them—they want a full breakdown of ux laws and design thinking with as many jargons as you can blurt out. early in your career, or even later, articulating that intuition can be tough and sometimes there isn't any to articulate in the first place. it's built from experience, patterns you've absorbed, and subtle principles of what works visually. don't doubt it; it's likely spot on, even if the words aren't there yet. this setup can make design feel draining, turning teamwork into a constant justification session rather than pure creation. yet, here's the key: designers don't need a defense for every little element. design isn't something that requires endless justification—it's the bridge that gets a user from point a to point b, all while deeply prioritizing their experience and convenience. trust the process and never let shallow feedback shake your core confidence. ps: using above as a justification for poor design is definitely a skill issue but you get the gist of it.

complexity first, simplicity second people say “keep it simple,” but most approach it backwards. they start from simple, then add on complexity without seeing the whole. that’s how you end up with frankenstein products: clean-looking components awkwardly stitched together, held in place by duct tape and wishful thinking. true simplicity emerges only after you’ve grasped the full complexity first. you can’t abstract away what you don’t fully comprehend. once you deeply understand the entire system — the edge cases, feedback loops, emergent behaviors — then the elegant patterns start to surface, creating solutions that genuinely click. people often misunderstand complexity as the enemy of simplicity. but complexity isn’t the enemy, it’s reality. your goal isn’t to ignore complexity, but to master it. when you think holistically, you create systems whose parts reinforce each other rather than clash. the UI naturally mirrors the underlying data model. the API aligns seamlessly with how users think. the entire product feels inevitable. real builders dive into the messy reality and embrace it. they map out the bizarre edge cases, user mental models, technical constraints, and business pressures. they sit patiently with complexity until the right patterns emerge. only then do they craft the simple, intuitive interface that makes all that complexity invisible. it’s like a swan, serene on the surface but paddling like hell beneath. this is why Notion succeeds where most productivity apps fail. we didn’t start by saying, “let’s build a simple notes app.” we asked, “how would people organize and share information, with the fewest primitives” then we built abstractions that aligned with those conceptual models. systems thinking is essential because it’s the only path to building products that scale — not just technically, but cognitively. users shouldn’t need to grasp your internal complexities to extract value. that’s the paradox: the more deeply you embrace complexity in your thinking, the simpler the experience becomes.

Gradient Extrude – Google I/O 2025 Visuals Prompt below 👇

Polaroid stickers – Made in Perplexity. Style codes in Perplexity work best when you give crisp technical details — especially with the 'Sonar' model. It doesn't require elaborate attributes. Prompt below 👇

✳︎ Launching — JSON Visuals for ChatGPT 50 unique aesthetic codes, with attribute randomiser to get infinite style combinations. [input image] [json style code] → 🪄 Link in comments 👇 One of my fav is the Absurd Technology style. Do try out your fav styles and comment • reposts appreciated...

If you have spent enough time designing products, you will arrive at a stage of rapid mental iterations - most of your visual style choices can appear infront of your eyes before even jumping into any tool. While you might be iterating on a screen/flow in the Figma canvas - hundreds of iterations also happen at the same time infront of your eyes. It feels magical, cannot be explained. Humans are amazing.

The true measure of design prowess isn't in creating for oneself, but for others. Design involves deciphering implicit cultural cues through research and dialogue, then transforming these insights into tangible outcomes.

relationships, jobs, projects—all survive difficulty if there's a compelling narrative about why the struggle matters. people don't leave when things are bad. they leave when they lose the story about why it's worth staying. meaning beats happiness every time.

I had Grok explain this to me like a 5 year old: “Imagine you have a magical toy box where you can put toys in, but every time you do, the box splits into two new boxes. In one box, the toy is red, and in the other, it's blue. Now, think of our world like that toy box. Google's new quantum chip, which is like a super-duper smart computer, did something so fast that it's like it used not just one box but lots of different boxes (or universes) at the same time to do its work. The idea is: - **Quantum Computers:** They're special because they can do things in a way that regular computers can't. They use something called "qubits" which can be in many states at once, not just on or off like normal computers. - **Multiple Universes:** Some scientists think that every time something very tiny happens (like a particle choosing which way to go), the world splits into different versions where each choice happens. So, there could be a universe where you ate ice cream for breakfast and one where you had cereal. - **Google's Chip:** When Google says their chip "indicates that multiple universes exist," they're saying it worked so much faster than we thought possible, it's like it was using help from these other universes to do its calculations. But remember, this is still a big, tricky idea for grown-ups too. It's like saying, "Wow, this toy box is so magical, it's like there are many boxes working together, even if we can't see them!" So, in simple words: - Google made a super smart toy that did something so incredible, it's like it got help from lots of other toy boxes (or universes) we can't see. This doesn't mean we've proven there are other universes, but it's a cool new way to think about how these super-smart toys (quantum computers) work.”

“Craft is dedication and respect for the invisible work”

The Orchid

Just finished creating a timelapse of 1.3 million trades lighting up India during Muhurat Trading 2024 on Groww! 🌟 Would love to hear your thoughts! 😊 Check out the interactive experience here: muhurattrading.vercel.app/ #DataViz #Diwali2024 #groww #d3js

When I design in Figma, I heavily rely on Auto Layout. I don't feel any limitations at all. I can position elements exactly where I want them almost without thinking. Because of this, I can now often skip the design phase when I'm coding since Figma's Auto Layout works just like CSS Flexbox. I can simply translate what's in my mind directly into CSS. Btw @tailwindcss is awesome, it makes everything even faster.

In 2019, a month after I had joined Shopify, I sent this note to my team. I called it "say the thing" and I think it has stood the test of time well.

Indeed, kudos to @JeffBezos

I just found out that Bill Watterson (the genius behind Calvin and Hobbes) gave a commencement speech in 1990 and it's incredible 1/2

Musk deserves respect but if his grandiose accomplishments inspire you to “dream big”, remember that he sacrificed everything: his life, his family, probably his sanity. And almost didn’t make it. Almost no one makes it.

Me: documentation is easy! Me after one day of trying to write documentation:

“A fundamental problem is that a designer’s influence only extends to the glowing lure … it’s not just a designer’s job, but everyone’s job, to consider context… “ —@SherylCababa #systemsthinking

Apple’s attention to detail is INSANE. You can’t watch this and not smile.