"The problem with the rich and powerful owning / co-opting social change is that they define social change precisely in a way where power does not change hands, where lives are bettered within the current power distribution."
"So called "speculative design" or "critical design" are in reality institutional projects that have little use or interest outside of the institutions that generate them. Whilst this crit room fodder can have a lot of pedagogical value in school, it is a mistake to presume as the fine artist does, that your particular brand of self-indulgent navel-gazing is something the rest of the world needs or wants. Ironically the lack of any criteria for "speculative" or "critical" design makes critical evaluation impossible. It doesn't have to do anything (outside of the classroom). Your fantasy praxis is the residue of privilege. Obviously if the work is brilliant, beautiful or interesting, that is reason enough for it to exist – but mostly it's just dumb and boring."
And this is perhaps the most important: Let the tools you make ask questions, not just solve problems.
Our decisions should start from the content out, not canvas in. Design in the absence of content is not design, it’s decoration like Jeffrey Zeldman once wrote.
Huebler said, ‘the world is full of objects, more or less interesting; I do not wish to add any more. I prefer, simply, to state the existence of things in terms of time and/or place.’