What do you see in the picture? A piece of cardboard? Some junk? No! — It’s a model!

Thread on models and bounded contexts 1/9

#DDDesign #BoundedContext

It’s a model of the Siemens KG86NAI31L fridge. The cardboard doesn’t look anything like the fridge? — That’s true but not important. A model is not a copy of a real-world entity but a construct supposed to solve a problem. 2/9
Hence, the correct question to ask is: what problem does this model solve? In our apartment, we have a weird entry to the kitchen. The cardboard’s is in the size of the fridge’s width and depth, and the problem it solves is checking whether it can make it through the door. 3/9
As the saying goes, all models are wrong, but some are useful. This model is wrong in many different ways. Nevertheless, it is useful. It helped us to decide whether to buy the fridge or look for a smaller one. 4/9
Building an exact, 3d cardboard copy of the fridge would definitely be a fun project! But would it make the solution any better or more precise? No. If the 2d model fits, a 3d model will fit as well. 5/9
But what about the fridge’s height? What if the base fits, but it’s too tall for that door? Would that justify building a 3d cardboard fridge? — Nope. A simple tape measure does the job. What is a tape measure in this case? — Another simple model. 6/9
So we have two models of the same fridge to check whether it can make it through our weird kitchen door. That piece of cardboard and a tape measure reflect the DDD’s approach to modeling business domains. 7/9
A domain model should omit the extraneous information irrelevant to its task. Also, no need to design a complex jack-of-all-trades model if multiple, much simpler models can effectively solve each problem individually. 8/9
Finally, a model is only valid for the specific problem it is supposed to solve: its bounded context. 9/9

More from Design

I've been thinking about the "reframing of powerlessness as righteousness" with regards to design education, and I want to jot down some loose thoughts...


Around 2012, while on summer break from what I felt was a lackluster school year, I was kind of at a breaking point. A prominent designer was peddling this self-help program, a $6000 weeklong workshop that centered around dinner with him and his influential friends.

His response to a fan who was deeply inspired by him and wanted to be a better designer, who asked "what if I can't afford the $6000?" was "You simply don't *want* to afford it." It's not a priority for you. I remember seeing it on Facebook and getting up from my chair.

It was gross, and it felt like the latest incident in what seemed like a long generational road of manipulating impressionable young people into thinking that the only thing stopping them from having the lives of these visible figures was passion

It felt wrong. Absolutely wrong. I thought about my best friend from high school. Someone just as—if not more—talented than me in art. Both of us dreamed of going to the same art school. Only one of us did. His familial socioeconomics as his undocumented status made it impossible

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
And here they are...

THE WINNERS OF THE 24 HOUR STARTUP CHALLENGE

Remember, this money is just fun. If you launched a product (or even attempted a launch) - you did something worth MUCH more than $1,000.

#24hrstartup

The winners 👇

#10

Lattes For Change - Skip a latte and save a life.

https://t.co/M75RAirZzs

@frantzfries built a platform where you can see how skipping your morning latte could do for the world.

A great product for a great cause.

Congrats Chris on winning $250!


#9

Instaland - Create amazing landing pages for your followers.

https://t.co/5KkveJTAsy

A team project! @bpmct and @BaileyPumfleet built a tool for social media influencers to create simple "swipe up" landing pages for followers.

Really impressive for 24 hours. Congrats!


#8

SayHenlo - Chat without distractions

https://t.co/og0B7gmkW6

Built by @DaltonEdwards, it's a platform for combatting conversation overload. This product was also coded exclusively from an iPad 😲

Dalton is a beast. I'm so excited he placed in the top 10.


#7

CoderStory - Learn to code from developers across the globe!

https://t.co/86Ay6nF4AY

Built by @jesswallaceuk, the project is focused on highlighting the experience of developers and people learning to code.

I wish this existed when I learned to code! Congrats on $250!!