[ElemenoPicuares]

This topic is vastly more complex that the author realizes. This window placement technique is one of many design facets that create the intended visual impact of these buildings and isn't close to their most significant difference to those large functional midcentury apartment blocks. Not only do architects need a 3 year graduate degree and board certification to start their careers, brand new architects are not the ones designing large public buildings. The author assuming that their musings about window placement on Vegas hotels could in any way inform seasoned and well-educated architects' design approach is pure hubris. Ridiculous.

It reads like a non-developer reading a bunch of articles about tech buzzword du jour like blockchain or microservices and then ham-fistedly using that to "explain" the architectural shortcomings of a bunch of complex systems that they couldn't hope to understand designed by heavily educated and experienced professionals. An actual developer would roll their eyes but if the author's readers aren't developers, it not only sounds as credible, it sounds more credible because someone is finally explaining that complex thing in a way that makes sense to people who reason about problems the same way they do.

If you want to learn about some knowledge domain like architecture, you're a whole lot better off reading architectural blogs than a technical person's musings about it. Misconceptions born from a similar perspective to yours are going to seem undeservedly credible and be a lot more difficult to parse and filter out.

[ketzo]

It seems like you know more of the things that the author is missing in their explanation.

I think your comment would bring more value to the world if you actually talked about some of those design facets, instead of taking so much time to trash a person for their intellectual curiosity.

[ElemenoPicuares]

That's because I wasn't talking about design: I was talking about expertise.

My professional discipline shares some baseline knowledge with architects and I enjoy architecture, but I am not an architect. I know enough about it to realize that you're better off listening to an architect talk about architecture than me, and way better than someone with no design background at all.

Aside from my design discipline, I was also a classically trained chef, and also spent quite some time as a software developer. The number of times a person from an engineering-type background haughtily "explained" my areas of expertise to me is gob smacking. I'm far beyond the point in life where I feel the need to hold my tongue when I recognize someone speaking with authority well outside of their expertise, especially if they're getting attention by doing so.

[ketzo]

Is the author really speaking with “authority,” though? If anything, they go out of their way to remind the reader that “your taste may differ from mine.”

It just reads to me like someone sharing an interesting idea they discovered. I feel like any accusations of haughtiness are a little overblown.

[ElemenoPicuares]

For example: "This makes a lot of sense to me. Because order and variety is what we experience in nature. For example, trees and mountains follow recognizable patterns, they have shapes that allow us to categorize them. Yet each tree and mountain is different and unique. The human body, as well, has forms common to all, it has symmetry and proportion, yet each individual is different.

What makes these monster buildings so unsettling is that instead of a delicate balance of order and variety, they have too much of both. The moster building has too much order - it's a box with long rows of windows. But the façade also has way too much variety because of the AC units and the mishmash of colours and window frames."

(a bunch of declarative statements about hotels based on visual analysis)

"But I think this kind of visual trick could find application in high-rise residential buildings to make façades look nicer and gentler."

They are making technical design analyses of buildings, criticising architects based on that, and making recommendations to architects for future work. Professional design critique also includes matters of artistic opinion mixed in.

Developers and their ilk spend all day thinking up solutions to novel and difficult problems in ways that really matter, and that's awesome. Irreplaceable. At times it seems like the only thing between us and an incredible shining future in so many domains is just having enough dev time to do the research and solve the problems! The other people in the process just sort of fall to the wayside while developers do the real work.

Many developers forget that their knowledge is domain-specific, and no matter how broad the applications are for their skills, it doesn't increase the value of their perspective beyond code. Every designer I've met who's worked in tech, and many others such as communications people, managers, support people, etc have been frustrated by this exact attitude. Confidently weilding criticism and dismissing ideas in realms far outside of their expertise.

If people publicly criticize the work of professionals without the requisite knowledge, they shouldn't be taken aback when someone tells them they're taking out of their tuba.

[whall6]

Likewise, is there any literature or other resources that you could refer us to?

Im highly interested in this topic especially because I’ve seen the reverse pattern in the city where I live: a building that’s not as tall designed to look bigger than it is. I’d love to learn more

[ElemenoPicuares]

I think Dezeen is a great place to start to keep up with things. When you get a little deeper, you'll have a better idea of where to look for more in-depth books, etc. that are more specific to your areas of interest.

[cj]

Comments like this are why I never got into blogging.

If I had a blog, there’s an extremely narrow domain of knowledge I would be “allowed” to write about by this commenter’s standards.

This particular blog post is acceptable in my opinion because they aren’t making some crazy claims, it’s just a collection of simple observations and amusing conjecture.

[llanowarelves]

Nah, just write what you want to write.

People can challenge things casually or critically, and it's not meant to be taken personally -- and even if it was, easily ignorable. Good to have some organic haters (not saying the above commenter is, just saying generally among the public masses) to monetize the energy and attention.

[ElemenoPicuares]

You can write whatever you want. If someone who knows more pointing out that you're off-base is that much of a deterrent, you're probably right to avoid it. As I said above, I'm far beyond the point in life where I feel the need to hold my tongue when I recognize someone speaking with authority well outside of their expertise, especially if they're getting attention by doing so.

[cj]

The thing is, the author doesn’t seem (to me) to be speaking from a place of authority.

The post doesn’t read like a textbook. It reads like someone’s casual musings.

There are other cases where I think authors overstate their position of authority, but the tone of this blog post doesn’t have that.

[twelve40]

off base about what? that grouping windows makes the building look less cluttered? is that a crazy thing to say out loud?

[_8j50]

Wow, that's a lot of words you are using to disagree with exactly nothing the author wrote. Commentary on builiding design just as with any topic is just that, not hubris. A person does not need degrees and 10yrs of experience to make an observation about the design patterns of buildings.

You could maybe contribute to the discussion by perhaps mentioning one specific thing the author or the video they used as expert reference get wrong.

[ElemenoPicuares]

See my answers to the above comments.

[tinym]

Are there any architectural blogs you recommend?

[ElemenoPicuares]

I like Dezeen, Arch Daily, and The City Fix for more urban design type stuff.

[justin66]

Your turtleneck is showing.

[ElemenoPicuares]

s1ck b3rn m8