Comments on: Anti-homeless ‘stools’

By: Lee Burnett

Lee Burnett — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:12:23 +0000

How about design that is aimed at getting to the core of a problem? This idea has no real substance, it is merely the typical “I don’t mind as long as it’s not in my neighbourhood” mentality that does not solve a problem (which good design does) but instead pushes the problem elsewhere.

The real issue is not homeless people sleeping on benches, the issue is economic and political. The effort, thought and money that went into this stupid project could have gone towards HELPING the homeless, rather than blaming, degrading and moving them along.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:29:33 +0000

U guys are sick and twisted

By: None of 3

None of 3 — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:47:55 +0000

“why do homeless layabouts get more consideration”

Because they don’t get a choice.

By: People are too smart for choice architecture sometimes II « Nudge blog

People are too smart for choice architecture sometimes II « Nudge blog — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:52:47 +0000

[...] Via Dan Lockton’s Architecture of Control [...]

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:41:35 +0000

So, I’m wondering…why do homeless layabouts get more consideration than those waiting for a bus? Seems to me that this approach is great user-centered design–design for bus riders, not homeless people taking more space than paying customers.

Sorry, but being homeless doesn’t give a person more–or fewer–rights than people with homes have.

By: chrisco

chrisco — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:30:39 +0000

It’s amazing how some people and governments can look at a problem — homelessness — and see “solutions” like these anti-homeless person and anti-sleepy person devices.

Also, these devices have more parts and are more expensive, so not only do they harm the sleepy and/or homeless, they those who could have had a bench at their location, but can’t have one because the a-holes decided it was better to have 100 anti-homeless person and anti-sleepy person devices then 200 regular benches.

Why do people not notice/care/say/do?

By: Bill Abel

Bill Abel — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:17:52 +0000

How ethical is it to spend so much money to make life that much harder on the poor?

This is an example of unethical design and an attitude of the America that must change.

A better solution would have been to design a place to accommodate the homeless rather than ostracize them.