And a good day to you too! :]
As with similar "laws" (e.g., Murphy's law), it is intended to be humorous rather than the literal truth.
The general context of the article was quite good and I agree with their larger point. I don't believe we are doing enough to push technology to solve human problems. Products are being simplified and tasks commoditized to the point that they are becoming less and less relevant to a broader user base. AI will be necessary to solve some of these problems but many can be solved now with a little forethought and less culling of an app's purpose to the absolute barebones just to ship it.
I don’t believe human-centred design and sustainability are in opposition. Sustainability is in Dieter’s design principles after all and those are over half a century old. The cut in the shower door can still be used to turn on the cold water, should you desire that.
I also believe you’re kidding yourself if you believe being a product designer professionally isn’t getting in bed w capitalism in some form. Not that I mind this, personally.
Some quick reactions
I love the depth of thoughtfulness and reflection. Its hard to tear away from the status quo and provide enough of an argument to change minds.
I think human-centeredness can still provide the same needed outcome. It just matters the criteria. Find out what people want and give it to them or find out what they need and give it to them. If what they need isn't what they want, thats part of the challenge.
Overall we need to bring our values to work, we need to bring our values to friendships, we need to bring our values to government. The only way to do this is to learn how to argue well, to keep an open mind, and tolerate others with differing views.
Starting reading ..... then it got boring.
As per Dirk's comment. No
There are more than a few designers writing very thoughtful pieces on this topic, but most blogs are too short or just lack the depth entirely to thoughtfully discuss it. They are also quite academic in nature, so they don't get the eyeballs they deserve.
HCD/UCD and "Anthropological Design," as I've seen it described, represent the dominant design approaches/values. My guess is that HCD/USD are just such 'compelling' ideas, not much critical thought is given to what it actually means or why you shouldn't or should adopt it. Many other frameworks exist that can complement or contrast it, such as Ecological Design or even "Systems Thinking" ... it'd be great to see more discussion around the merit of these approaches.