
Lately I find myself coming back to the same tension. The safe move is almost always to optimize for the thing you can measure: look current, hold attention, be frictionless to use. It usually works, while also sanding off the jagged edges that made it interesting in the first place.
Three versions of that trade are playing out below: a basketball logo that won by refusing to flinch, a story format engineered so well you forget to actually feel anything, and a music player people loved precisely because nobody had optimized it yet.



The logo that refuses to rebrand.
Some pro sports logos have the shelf life of a haircut. A new owner, a losing streak, or the simple itch to juice apparel sales. The Knicks sat through all of it. The blocky letters, basketball, and inverted triangle Michael Doret drew by hand in 1992 are essentially the same mark that just rode through a championship run, the one painted on faces and held over heads while the whole city lost its voice. When the moment finally came, the thing New Yorkers were carrying in their hearts was a logo from the nineties.
The reflex, in branding as in everything, is to react. Someone else moves, the category shifts, a trend hardens, and the instinct is to respond, to refresh, to signal you're paying attention. Staying put reads as standing still. But the Knicks logo is a quiet argument for the opposite: hold the line long enough that the thing stops being a logo and becomes a fact of the city, the way the Yankees' NY just is New York. Everyone borrows it now, from Kith to Zohran Mamdani's campaign, precisely because it never chased them. Consistency looks like doing nothing, right up until the moment it looks like the only thing everyone else wishes they'd done.



Ninety seconds to the next betrayal.
Somewhere right now, a billionaire is learning that his contract bride is secretly the heir to the empire that ruined his family, and the whole revelation took about ninety seconds. This is a micro-drama: vertical, shot for the phone, sliced into one-to-two-minute episodes that each end on a cliffhanger right as the app asks you to buy a few more coins to keep watching. The genre took off in China during the pandemic and has since colonized American phones through apps like ReelShort and DramaBox, the latter now claiming more monthly users than Hulu. The plots are gleefully interchangeable: will the secret werewolf reclaim his throne, will the fake marriage become real, will humanity survive the CEO's amnesia?
None of it is written to be remembered. It's engineered to be un-closable, tuned episode by episode to the exact moment your thumb hesitates, then billed by the coin to resolve it. What's being swapped out is taste: the instinct of a writer or director about what makes a scene land, replaced by a kind of algorithmic survival of the fittest where whatever holds you wins and everything else dies in testing. Every brand now has the same lever within reach, the ability to test and optimize its way to something nobody can scroll past. But attention isn't affection. And a feed full of things you couldn't stop watching and can't name the next morning is what that trade actually buys.



65,000 ways to skin a llama.
Your music player used to be the most personal thing on your computer. Winamp, the little MP3 app that proudly announced it "really whips the llama's ass," let you peel off the default look and dress the thing in whatever someone had cooked up in a bedroom: chrome and flames, anime characters, a working interface shaped like a slice of pizza. A developer named Jordan Eldredge has now archived more than 65,000 of these skins at a browsable site, Webamp, where each one loads as a fully functioning player. It is, accidentally, the largest museum of amateur interface design ever assembled, and most of it looks gloriously unwell.
Scroll it long enough and you notice what we traded away. Winamp belonged to a brief, glorious window when software adapted to human eccentricity instead of asking humans to conform to one seamless interface. Choosing your skin was an act of identity, the digital equivalent of stickers on a laptop, and the ugliness was the point: it was yours. There's a real case for what replaced it, of course. Standardized interfaces are predictable and genuinely more usable, because we're all trained on the same visual cues, and the same gray rectangle on every phone means nobody has to relearn anything. But somewhere in there it got quietly decided that software is about function and not form, and form was sometimes the entire point. All work and no play makes for a very efficient, very forgettable home screen.

Three Curious Things is where I explore how ideas take shape across art, culture, and brands. In my day to day work, I do the same with tech companies, usually when something has changed and the story hasn’t caught up.

