One of the things I love, mostly due to my other regular online writing job is that I often get sent previews of apps that are not yet released to the public. Sometimes, these are offers to get in on the beta test, sometimes it is a link to download the app to check it out and give my feedback, sometimes, it is just a pitch for an idea for an app.

It is the last of these that I especially love because a great app begins with a great idea. And, while I see a lot of good ideas showing up on my digital doorstep, on very, very rare occasions a great one shows up. Ones that, once seen, I literally burst out laughing with glee and excitement. Though almost always sworn to secrecy, which I always keep, it is these apps that test such resolve the most.

I’ve started to notice a trend with the apps that garner my personal praise. Some traits that they almost always share. These would be:

• Simplicity — They are almost always dead simple apps. They usually only do one or two things, really. Yet, the thing they do is almost always a very useful thing. The interesting thing is that it is often the case that there are many other apps already that do those same one or two things. Which brings me to…

• Ingenuity — What sets these apps apart is that what they do they do not only well but in a way that no one has yet thought of. Then, once you see the way these apps do that thing you know instantly that it is the right way to do it and you wonder why no one else has done it that way before. Because, it is obvious that it is the way it should be done. Then, it occurs to you that the reason no one else has done it is that no one else has had…

• Gumption — The gumption to not only think of the best way — the now obvious way —but the willingness to do the hard work to get it done. Because the right way sometimes takes courage, or time, or is just a plain straight-up hack. But, gumption is what it takes to get the job done.

And when these three traits come together… Ooh boy! You might have a great thing on your hands. And the world needs more great things.

I’m a full-time independent writer who works hard to bring you quality reading and ideas here daily. If you enjoy what you read here, please consider a free will donation of any amount.

Noun: A group of people or things having similar characteristics: “all kinds of music”.
Adjective: Having or showing a friendly, generous, and considerate nature: “a kind woman”.

Kind is a word I use a lot. If you have ever sent me a complementary email or have done something nice for me online, I usually will thank you for your kindness. If you say something overly great about me, I may modestly say you are being too kind.

There is a reason I choose this word, specifically. It is because of it’s duality of purpose as both noun and adjective and to encompass both meanings at once.

When a deed is done that is kind, I hope to make such kindness a part of my being as well — to be a person as the same kind of the doer. Its meaning here embodies the word as noun. I also, in the same action, embody the word as an adjective and use it in reply thusly.

Furthermore, from a faith practice perspective, the idea and act of loving-kindness is one that is central to my beliefs.

All of this is to say that I tend to choose the words I use, especially in writing, carefully. If you see me use a word or phrase often, it is likely chosen for its specific meaning.

Your kind donation of any amount helps to support a full-time independent writer. Thanks for reading!

“A respected Swiss scientist, Conrad Gessner, might have been the first to raise the alarm about the effects of information overload. In a landmark book, he described how the modern world overwhelmed people with data and that this overabundance was both “confusing and harmful” to the mind. The media now echo his concerns with reports on the unprecedented risks of living in an “always on” digital environment. It’s worth noting that Gessner, for his part, never once used e-mail and was completely ignorant about computers. That’s not because he was a technophobe but because he died in 1565. His warnings referred to the seemingly unmanageable flood of information unleashed by the printing press.” — A history of media technology scares, from the printing press to Facebook. – Slate Magazine

As I read more and more of the discussion around Google Glass (especially: The Google Glass feature no one is talking about — Creative Good ), the more I’m reminded of the anecdote quoted above. Similar discussions were had around the advent of the first telephone, and radio, and television.

As we venture down some of the paths that things like Google Glass may lead, the social nuances and implications that come with this technology will be an oft debated subject.

Yet, is that any different from what we have now? I think not. There is much ongoing discussion of the social implications of the smartphone. We continue to discuss the etiquette of those who never seem to be able to look up from the screen to have a conversation or eat a single meal without snapping a picture of it. Some have even taken it upon themselves to create games designed to enforce appropriate social behavior in their usage.

The only difference we face going forward, if there really is one, is the increasing oneness we will continue to have with technology.