#Throwaway Prototype

[teleglobalinternational]

Choosing the Right Software Prototype for Your Project

That brilliant idea for an app or software? It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement and want to jump straight into coding. But what if you could test drive your concept, catch problems early, and get real feedback before spending a fortune? That's the magic of Software Prototypes.

Think of it as a dressing function for your software. It’s about creating a working model to see how your idea feels and functions in the real world. According to a helpful guide by TeleGlobals, the trick is picking the right kind of rehearsal for your show. Let's break the options in easy terms:

The Quick Sketch (Throwaway Prototype): Imagine sketching your idea on a napkin to see if it makes sense. This is the digital version—a fast, low-cost model built to test a core concept. You'll gather crucial feedback and then, as the name implies, toss the prototype and build the real thing from scratch, only smarter.

The Growing Sapling (Evolutionary Prototype): This approach starts with a small, basic version of your product that actually works. Then, based on user input, you continuously water, prune, and grow it—adding features and refining it over time. This tiny sapling eventually blossoms into your final, polished software.

The Lego Set (Incremental Prototype): Building a massive, complex application? Forget to build all at once. This method is like building a giant Lego castle one section at a time. You create and test separate, self-contained pieces of the software and then click them together as you go. This is a key aspect of prototype software development.

The "Looks First" Model (Extreme Prototype): This one is all about the user experience, especially for websites and web apps. You build the front-end of the website—the part that users see and interact with at first glance. It looks and feels like a finished product, but the behind-the-scenes mechanics are simulated. Once the look and feel are perfect, a critical step in UI UX design software, you build the engine to make it all run.

Choosing your path isn't just a technical decision; it's a strategic one. By matching your project's needs with the right prototyping style, you're not just building software—you're building it right.

Read More:

[cognitivejustice]

Firstly, the researchers removed the phones’ batteries and replaced them with external power sources to reduce the risk of chemical leakage into the environment, a ScienceDaily report explains. 

Then, four phones were connected together, fitted with 3D-printed casings and holders, and turned into a working prototype ready to be reused.

“Innovation often begins not with something new, but with a new way of thinking about the old, re-imagining its role in shaping the future,” says Huber Flores, Associate Professor of Pervasive Computing at the University of Tartu in Estonia.  

The prototype created by researchers was put to use underwater, where it participated in the monitoring of marine life by helping to count different sea species. 

Normally, these kinds of tasks require a scuba diver to record video and bring it to the surface for analysis. The prototype meant the whole process could be done automatically underwater.

And there are many other ways that a phone’s capacity to efficiently process and store data can be put to good use after its WhatsApping days are done.

These mini data centres could also be used at bus stops, for example, to collect real-time data on the number of passengers. This could help to optimise public transportation networks.

Such smartphone repurposing is just a drop in the ocean of issues that natural resource mining, energy-intensive production and e-waste present. Ultimately, we need to challenge this throwaway culture and move to a more circular model. 

[lorata]

I just realized Leander and marvel are about the same age (a year apart, I think) do you think Leander knows marvel? If he does what does, what did he think of him?

okay so this one

marvel is a fascinating character and i love him, especially with the added nuance of his casting, because the other d1 victor we get is gloss who is HUGE and gorgeous, prototypical adonis etc, and then marvel is ....... well he's nepo baby jack quaid, who has grown into himself and become quite handsome but at 19 was fit but still kinda scrawny and a bit dorky and made up most of it with personality, and then he has the name marvel, which is a My Precious Baby name if i ever heard one, but anyway, D1 the Pretty District puts out this average kid (JACK QUAD YOU'RE GORGEOUS YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN) which means he made up for it in other ways

marvel fascinates me and one of the enduring images of canon that i put in a throwaway line in the background of a fic one time is his body just like ....... lying there, forgotten, while katniss did her whole tribute to rue (bc the hovercraft couldn't come get it until she was done) bc he killed her! he didn't deserve one! so he's just There, Dead

anyway. ANYWAY. marvel! unfortunately in a lot of my stuff he is a victim of convenience, meaning i needed a villain and he was there, so i had him channel all that Not Quite Enough energy into nastiness, kind of like Claudius but ..... Worse, because of D1's whole thing. i don't actually think this is Canon Necessarily or even my actual headcanon, it's just the space he wound up taking? it says less about marvel and more about the hostile environment he's in, regardless

marvel and leander ........... i feel like they would have butted heads, both of them have something to prove: leander, being extremely pretty, that he's Not Like That even though deep inside he knows he is; marvel, not pretty, that he's Good Enough, which in d1 mostly means hurting other people where the trainers can see. which is to say, at one point, marvel tried to attack leander to prove his toughness and leander bashed his face in, which put leander on the fast track to volunteer and marvel refusing to quit after did the same

leander doesn't think anything about marvel, he's just one of the many who've tried it. marvel probably DOES think more about leander, as he's probably one of the few who ever hurt him that badly and he wasn't allowed to get him back for it (both were warned off --they're not here to kill each other, that's a waste of investment)

they're both the product of a really awful system and they hate each other and they both die! and nobody cares!

[fannyfanfaniel]

hi chat I’m here to introduce you to my Mephone of, MephoneR. He was originally created as a throwaway for an rp,,, and then everyone got emotionally attached /hj the lore is that he’s a prototype to Mephone x and based on the Jurassic park movies. A weapon, born to kill. But eventually he escapes and has to learn how to be gentle. After all, he never wanted to hurt anything. ”I love flowers, they’re so beautiful, yet delicate.. holding them feels like proving I don’t have to hurt things.”

[canonical-transformation]

"the Balladeer was a prototype Shogun" would have been a much more fun reveal if they'd held off on saying it out loud until Ei Act 2 or smth.

Imagine Opulent Husk of Dreams being the first bit of lore to solidly connect Miko's throwaway line about "oh yeah there was a prototype, Ei tossed it out" to the Fatuus who has eyes like the Shogun's.

[blubberquark]

Your Code Is Hard To Read!

This is one of those posts I make not because I think my followers need to hear them, but because I want to link to them from Discord from time to time. If you are a Moderator, Contributor or "Helpfulie" on the PyGame Community Discord, I would welcome your feedback on this one!

"You posted your code and asked a question. We can't answer your question. Your code is hard to read."

Often when we tell people this, they complain that coding guidelines are just aesthetic preferences, and they didn't ask if their code followed coding guidelines. They asked us to fix the bug. That may be so, but the problem remains: If you ask us to fix your code, we can only help you if we can read it.

Furthermore, if there are many unrelated bugs, architectural problems, and hard to understand control flow, the concept of fixing an isolated bug becomes more and more unclear.

In order to fix unreadable code, you could:

eliminate global variables

replace magic numbers with constants

replace magic strings with enumerations

name classes, functions, constants, variables according to consistent coding standards

have functions that do one thing and one thing only like "collision detection" or "collision handling". If your function does two things at the same time, like rendering AND collision detection, then it must be refactored

rewrite deeply nested and indented code to be shallower

rewrite code that keeps a lot of state in local variables into special-case functions

use data structures that make sense

write comments that explain the program, not comments that explain the programming language

delete unneccessary/unreachable code from the question to make it easier to read or from your program to see if the problem persists

My own programs often violate one or more of those rules, especially when they are one-off throwaway scripts, or written during a game jam, or prototypes. I would never try to ask other people for help on my unreadable code. But I am an experienced programmer. I rarely ask for help in an unhelpful way. Almost never ask for help in a way that makes other experienced programmers ask for more code, or less code, or additional context. I post a minimal example, and I usually know what I am doing. If I don't know what I am doing, or if I need suggestions about solving my problem completely differently, I say so.

Beginner programmers are at a disadvantage here. They don't know what good code looks like, they don't know what good software architecture looks like, they don't know how to pare down a thousand lines of code to a minimal example, and if they try to guess which section of code contains the error, they usually guess wrong.

None of this matters. It may be terribly unfair that I know how to ask smart questions, and beginner programmers ask ill-posed questions or post code that is so bad it would be easier and quicker for an experienced programmer to re-write the whole thing. It is often not feasible to imagine what the author might have intended the code to work like and to fix the bugs one by one while keeping the structure intact. This is not a technical skill, this is a communicative and social skill that software engineers must pick up sooner or later: Writing code for other people to read.

If your code is too hard to read, people can't practically help you.

It gets worse. Unreadable code is sometimes unreadable because it is un-salvageable. It is hard to understand because there is nothing to understand, it would not work, and you need to go back to the drawing board.

Defensive Responses

This is not where the problem ends. Often, after a couple of rounds of back and forth, after questions like "Well, you say there is a bug, but can you tell me what you would want the code to do in the first place?", or "Is this a class or an instance? If it's supposed to be an instance variable, could you give it a lowercase name?" or "Could you give that variable _obj a more descriptive name? It looks like you are assigning different things to this variable in different parts of your loop. Perhaps you could use two variables with different, more descriptive names", you see a defensive response. The original question asker is not interested in making code easy to read, just in making it work. As I explained above, this is a confused way of thinking, because ill-posed questions and unreadable code make it difficult to impossible to make the code work, or to even understand what making it work would look like.

"Style is irrelevant." – This is by far the most common one. Since coding style, comments, variable names, and even re-factoring code into smaller functions do not affect the output, and thus not the correctness of the program.

"I asked for help with bugs, not style." – This is a variation on the first one. As long as there is no concrete and discrete bug, style feedback and questions for clarification can be discarded.

"This is too much work." – The original poster explains that making the code more readable is too much work for them, and fixing the bugs would be easier for others.

"Nobody will see the code anyway" – Nobody will see the code of the finished product, so it's irrelevant. Sometimes there are variations like "We aren't graded on code quality, only correctness" or "This is for a class project, nobody will depend on the code, so we don't need robustness."

"This is just throwaway code, it doesn't have to be good." – Like the previous one, this is frustrating to read because somebody posted the code on a forum for other people to read and asked them to understand it, and then said he doesn't care if it's readable or debuggable.

"I asked you for help." / "I am asking the questions here." – The original poster refuses to answer questions, because he asked, he expects answers, not questions in return.

"Don't blame me, I didn't write it" – We have completely left the realm of correctness and style now. The poster knows the code is unreadable, or doesn't make sense. He tried to protect his reputation. But he doesn't like the tone of the responses. Its not his fault the code doesn't make sense. It's not his fault if it doesn't work. Common variations are "This must be correct, it was the accepted answer on StackOverflow", or "I copied this from a tutorial", or "Don't blame me, this was written by GitHub Copilot". Often part of the problem is that the code has different parts written in different styles, or uses different data structures in different places, and both parts could benefit from a re-write to make them more consistent with each other. At other times the problem is that the code from the book is "correct" for certain purposes from the book, but not really suited for the problem at hand.

"I apologised already" – The poster is frustrated because he said "I am sorry I am a n00b" or "I am sorry for my bad English" already. Then somebody said his code is unreadable or his prose makes no sense. The poster sees readable code, or at least code that is readable enough to understand what the idea was, as a courtesy, as a social custom, not as something necessary to make the whole question and answer thing work. The same goes for a firm grasp of English. The poster apologised already that his English is bad, and you should just see past it. Dealing with this is especially difficult, because Q&A is framed as some kind of status game, and the poster is trying hard to save face already. Push-back will make him feel like he is losing face, and he will only get more defensive.

Causes

So where does the problem begin? Why do people write unreadable code, post it online, and get defensive? I think the answer is a combination of programming skill, social skill, and simplistic mental models.

Software Engineering is Difficult: Obviously, one root cause is that beginner programmers can't already write readable code from the start. Writing readable, well-factored code that is easy to debug, re-use, and adapt is something that comes with experience. Writing code for other people to read can only be learned after one has learned to write code.

Magical Thinking/Limited Cognitive Empathy: The most common and most direct cause of this phenomenon – the refusal to help others read your unreadable code – is not the unreadable code itself. It is the belief that it should be easy for experienced programmers to understand the structure of and intent behind a piece of code, even if the person who wrote it didn't. If you see software as basically magic, and don't see computers as soulless automatons that do what they do because they are built that way, then this is an easy trap to fall into.

A variant of this works for language. If somebody is bad at English, or bad at the technical jargon needed to ask his question, he will often think that the question he thought up in his native Klingon was perfectly well-formed, and that other people should have no trouble reading his words, because they also think in Klingon, so they would translate it into a question that makes sense anyway.

Status-Consciousness: Many beginner programmers feel the desperate need to distinguish themselves from other beginners, and if they have been learning JavaScript for two months now, they want to be seen as real programmers, not as children who play with Scratch and build Redstone contraptions in MineCraft. They want to be taken seriously. This reminds me of a five year old boy who stretches out his arm and tells me he is THIS BIG, and he is already FIVE, going on SIX, and he will go to SCHOOL soon.

Naive Mental Model of De-Bugging: Every program has a certain number of discrete features bugs, and when you remove all bugs, you end up with a program that works. This is of course nonsense. You can write a program that has an indeterminate number of bugs, or a program that implements an algorithm that doesn't quite work, or a useless program, or a program that does random nonsense.

With any luck, sooner or later, programmers will learn the technical side, and the social and collaborative side of software development.

[super-who-locked-me-in-here]

Okay so in Doctor Strange: Multiverse of Madness, Doctor Strange (Earth-616) tells Christine (Earth-838) "I love you. I love you in every universe." And I thought that was one of the most romantic things I'd ever heard, given Stephen's experience with both Christine and also with the multiverse, but especially coming from a superhero movie.

Like, the idea that no matter our circumstances, or when or where or how we live, as long as you are you and I am me, then I will love you. That love seems indescribable.

But recently I have started to dip my toes into Supernatural again, and I am completely entranced by Cas' love for Dean, the idea that this reality is the only one where I love you and that's fine because the only reality that matters to me is one where we're together.

Because that's what Chuck said, right? In every other universe or reality that he created, Cas never once strayed from his mission, his purpose, except for this one that we see the show take place in, because in this one he loved and wanted to be loved and was loved in return. Because in this universe he cared; Dean made him care.

I am obsessed with the idea that I only love you in this universe and that that's perfect. That it's good. Because it means this is the universe where I have hope and trust and I have you. Those other realities? They are nothing more than other versions of us. Prototypes. Projects. Throwaways. The fact that I love you in this universe despite it being written into the very fabric of the universe by God himself that we are meant to fail, that means something. That means that it doesn't matter what anyone says, that I am not going to be yet another eternal victim of fate, that I am able to choose my own path, and even if none of the other versions of me choose you as their path, it doesn't matter, because I am and I'm here and we're together and that's all I could ever need in any timeline, even if all the other realities but this one fail to grasp that.

And Destiel fucking gave us that. And I am in shambles.

[vinylspinning]

Mad Season: Above (1995)

Proof that sobriety isn't the only positive outcome of rehab, the group that would become Mad Season was concocted by Pearl Jam guitarist Mike McCready and Walkabouts bassist John Baker Saunders while they convalesced in just such a facility.

And when the pair recruited Alice in Chains singer Layne Staley and Screaming Trees drummer Barrett Martin, plus Trees singer Mark Lanegan in a limited capacity, one of the greatest grunge supergroups was born.

Well, at least according to this hack!

Their sole studio LP, Above, arrived just over 30 years ago into a marketplace that was still hungry for any product even remotely associated with Seattle, but it would test flannel-clad fans with a sound that wasn't entirely familiar.

In fact, "I Don't Know Anything," with its grinding, down-tuned riffs, hypnotic droning, and spikes of distortion, is the only real grunge prototype on hand; though I suppose "Lifeless Dead" deserves consideration based on its haunting atmosphere and morbid lyrics.

Everywhere else, though, Mad Season appear bent on confounding expectations (and good for them!) via surprisingly mellow ruminations like "Wake Up," "River of Deceit," and "All Alone," or the dragging blues-rock of "X-Ray Mind" and "Artificial Red."

McCready unleashes all his fretboard-shredding firepower on the instrumental "November Hotel," and Lanegan makes his first appearance on "I'm Above" (which sort of recalls Temple of the Dog), but the album's pièce de résistance is "Long Gone Day."

Here, both Lanegan and Staley lend their sublimely desolate, funereal tones to a startling escape into some form of psychedelic jazz, backed by Martin's subtle bongos and topped by alternately fluid and biting sax lines from session man Eric 'Skerik' Walton.

By and large, these are not immediately digestible, but rather challenging songs that only reveal their full greatness over time, and that's why Mad Season's music separated dedicated listeners from impulsive grunge consumers, like wheat from the chaff.

Trust me, I'm a farmer ... not!

This two-LP, 180-gram reissue unfortunately fails to restore the CD cover art to its full size, but tacks on five outtakes with a focus on Lanegan, who takes the mic for the driving "Locomotive" and the mournful tandem of "Black Book of Fear" and "Slip Away."

Rounding things out, McCready's solo acoustic "Interlude" is anything but a throwaway and Staley returns for a cover of John Lennon's "I Don't Wanna Be a Soldier," which also appeared on that year's Lennon tribute album, Working Class Hero.

In due time, Above went on to sell a half-million copies, but Mad Season never did reconvene for a second LP due to its members' primary band commitments and -- you guessed it -- persistent substance abuse.

Tragically, these relapses ultimately proved fatal for both Staley and Saunders (Lanegan followed them in 2022 of apparently natural causes), which reinforces Mad Season's fate as perhaps the most obviously doomed supergroup ever assembled ... but a great one at that!

Related: Alice in Chains' Facelift, Sap EP, Dirt, Jar of Flies EP, Black Gives Way to Blue; Pearl Jam: Ten, Vs., Vitalogy, Riot Act, Backspacer; Screaming Trees' Buzz Factory, Uncle Anesthesia, Sweet Oblivion, Dust; Temple of the Dog’s Temple of the Dog.

[une-sanz-pluis]

But some years after the Treaty of Troyes a rumor began that Charles VII was not his father’s son, and, increasingly remote from the feud that had dominated the early years of the fifteenth century and guided by stereotypes of feminine fickleness, historians of the following centuries began to condemn [Isabeau of Bavaria] as manipulating the dukes for her own gain. Her reputation deteriorated further when she became associated with the Cour amoureuse, the Court of Love, whose charter was discovered in the early eighteenth century. These different threads were gathered together by champion of the Revolution Louise de Kéralio in her diatribe against the queens of France. Kéralio makes the German-speaking Isabeau into a prototype of Marie-Antoinette—like Antoinette, Isabeau was “greedy, incapable of moderation in her desires, tormented by the desire to rule”—which was then taken up by nineteenth-century historians, many of whom were themselves rabidly anti-German for long-standing political reasons, and woven into narratives of national identity throughout the nineteenth and into the twentieth century.

Tracy Adams, "Misogynistic Throwaways: The Case of Isabeau of Bavaria", Queens, Regents, Mistresses: Reflections on Extracting Elite Women’s Stories from Medieval and Early Modern French Narrative Sources (2023)

[spacedinosaur2000]

My Bug dude Fenton Fly. I haven't treated my earliest creation to good, besides throwaway doodles or throwaway comics that I shouldn't have rushed through. And While my short film was more of a prototype I really need to develop this character better.

Also I'm so dumb I could have also posted my doodles here, what the hell am I doing???

[themichiferqueen]

Approaching my 1 year anniversary since posting en masse on the internet and it has revealed much. In short, I've gained: ✨ 200 combined followers between all my socials, some local, some far away ✨Have commissioned about 10 major art pieces that help demonstrate the different versions of the characters I'm portraying ✨Wrote (and yes, this is real) almost half a million words, not counting my prototype script that initially featured Lucifer and Eve. Based on hit count, that's 44 words per minute I type to get one view (which is fantastic, by the way, given I mostly do original, weird ass shit) AND ✨Have gained a collective amount of 1.2K views between my website, A03, and WattPad. I'm not even counting the responses to my Angel quiz or the Spotify playlists I've made!

I'm not pretending I'm the most popular, I just hope to be consistent in what I do. And, since I have, you as the audience have kindly shown me what you respond well to. Sometimes a thing I write that I think is a 'throwaway' gets way more hits than I expected. Then, even with fanfic-related content tied to another plotline like Hazbin or Lucifer (TV), you show your strong interest in what I have to say while getting that lovely dose of Michael/Lucifer we're all in need of since Supernatural is now a decade out.

Really, all I have to say is that it means the world to me that you even wanted to click on a post and read it, even if it's just 2 seconds. Those 2 seconds do more than you realize, which is partly why I won't give up doing what I'm doing. I just hope to evolve it and engage in great conversation with you about what these 'characters' mean to you when the world is coming down to its last lifeline.

Yours truly,

[teleglobalinternational]

Choosing the Right Software Prototype for Your Project

That brilliant idea for an app or software? It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement and want to jump straight into coding. But what if you could test drive your concept, catch problems early, and get real feedback before spending a fortune? That's the magic of Software Prototypes.

Think of it as a dressing function for your software. It’s about creating a working model to see how your idea feels and functions in the real world. According to a helpful guide by TeleGlobals, the trick is picking the right kind of rehearsal for your show. Let's break the options in easy terms:

The Quick Sketch (Throwaway Prototype): Imagine sketching your idea on a napkin to see if it makes sense. This is the digital version—a fast, low-cost model built to test a core concept. You'll gather crucial feedback and then, as the name implies, toss the prototype and build the real thing from scratch, only smarter.

The Growing Sapling (Evolutionary Prototype): This approach starts with a small, basic version of your product that actually works. Then, based on user input, you continuously water, prune, and grow it—adding features and refining it over time. This tiny sapling eventually blossoms into your final, polished software.

The Lego Set (Incremental Prototype): Building a massive, complex application? Forget to build all at once. This method is like building a giant Lego castle one section at a time. You create and test separate, self-contained pieces of the software and then click them together as you go. This is a key aspect of prototype software development.

The "Looks First" Model (Extreme Prototype): This one is all about the user experience, especially for websites and web apps. You build the front-end of the website—the part that users see and interact with at first glance. It looks and feels like a finished product, but the behind-the-scenes mechanics are simulated. Once the look and feel are perfect, a critical step in UI UX design software, you build the engine to make it all run.

Choosing your path isn't just a technical decision; it's a strategic one. By matching your project's needs with the right prototyping style, you're not just building software—you're building it right.

Read More:

[elkian]

So here’s a fun one.

There’s been posts on my dash over the years about how JRRT wouldn’t focus much on the “epic battles” in the Middle Earth books, because he’d survived those battles and they were awful and he didn’t want to give anyone the idea that he was glorifying them, supporting them. There’s been posts about how an accurate Hobbit movie, I think? would be a musical with Bilbo taking a post-picnic nap in the foreground, while a pitched battle is happening in the far back, too blurry to make out.

You know where this same phenomenon occurs?

Homestuck.

In the Author Commentary, Hussie even comments on the overall lack of large battles. We get John fighting Ogres in the first few Acts, we get [S] Make Her Pay, and so on. But our only glimpse of the Trolls’ Black King final battle is a narration over memory snapshots by Aradia, long after the fact.

The thing is that from the very first moment the readers encounter any troll, the story is long beyond that battle. The trolls winning is a foregone conclusion, even if that isn’t immediately obvious because the narrative is being built over time. Karkat - then only known as CG - even mentions having beaten their “NASTY 12X PROTOTYPED GIANT BLACK KING” in nearly a throwaway line as he exposits about the Reckoning, an event more immediately relevant to John.

The Black King fight is an important event - the trolls had to beat him to “win” Sgrub, to reach their reward (so close...). It really isn’t the kind of event that can just be handwaved... but it can be glossed over. Because they can’t have reached this point without doing it or breaking rules we didn’t even known needed to be broken yet, it’s just a past event for them.

An incredible team made a full animation for [S] Duodecim Rex Angelus that’s worth watching, and Hussie even apparently approved it as a viable depiction of canon events. So why did Hussie skip over this giant battle? Because that is, at the core, not what Homestuck in specific is about.

Homestuck is about a lot of things. God, it is about so many things all at once, and I will never fully plumb its depths, and that’s okay. I’ve been a pretty casual reader from the getgo and most all of my theorycrafting has been pretty base, and that’s okay, too, because there’s no wrong or right way to experience Homestuck imo. But my point here is: Homestuck is very often a story about stories. Meta is built into its narrative in a way I don’t see in much else. So when a storytelling decision or direction happens in it, it’s probably for a reason.

Fights in Homestuck have to have an explicit narrative meaning. John fighting the Ogres is a display of a lot of things: John’s new skill level, the abilities (and limitations) of the characters helping him, the inherent danger of this new world and the knowledge that things are only going to get tougher as it goes. Aradia beating Vriska bloody was a testament of Aradia’s renewed capacity for emotion, and also sets up some extremely important story beats down the line. The finale is the Finale, though truth be told I wouldn’t have put it past Hussie to PSYCHE us all out of that just to mess with us.

Anyways, no particular conclusion here, I just think it’s a really interesting trend.

[artistemor]

The Designs That Didn’t Go Anywhere — But Still Deserve a Spotlight

As a creative professional, it’s part of the process: you pitch ideas, respond to proposals, and sometimes pour hours (or days) into mockups, edits, or prototypes to prove your skills. But every so often—more often than we’d like—these projects don’t move forward.

Whether it’s interviews that stall, bids that don’t get the contract, or designs that remain “concept-only,” the work doesn’t stop being valuable. I’ve built motion graphics, 3D models, video edits, emails, and more—most of which I’ve never shared because they were tucked away in the “throwaway” pile.

But this year, I’m flipping the script. If 2024 gave me hours of work that went unused, I can at least give it a platform.

Mock Designs That Deserve the Light of Day

Here are some of the projects I created this past year that didn’t go anywhere but showcase skills I’m proud of. Maybe they didn’t win the bid or land the deal, but they serve as proof of the effort, creativity, and technical expertise I bring to the table.

Graphic/Video Sample: Concept for a fashion company along with logo design and flyers.

3D Model Mockup: Project intended for [describe briefly—e.g., product visualization, animation demo]

“Thank You, But No Thank You”

To the employers, collaborators, and clients who requested these mock designs: I appreciate the opportunity to flex my skills. However, I’m choosing to be more mindful of how my time and work are valued moving forward.

To future collaborators: let’s build together with clear intention. My portfolio speaks for itself, and I’m always ready to bring ideas to life.

For now, these “throwaways” get their moment to shine. Here’s to 2024’s effort, lessons learned, and better opportunities ahead.

If you’re looking for a creative partner with proven results (and a lot of experience making things happen, mock or real), feel free to contact me here! Let’s create work that does go somewhere.

[asktheevilgeniusesson]

Infinite- how does it feel knowing Eggman didn't trust you with the real copy of the ruby? It was just the final prototype he gave you- and then when he goes to use the real one because he's soooooo much better, he looses it.

“It.. pissed me off at first. Made me feel insignificant and like i was just a throwaway pawn. But when he lost the real one? Ohoh. I laughed in his face. Told him right in his face that he wasnt worthy and had no right using the ruby. He beat me to a pulp for it, and i dont regret it. Now i have the real one, and it stays with me at all times now that ive got it literally embedded in my chest. It hurts, sometimes, yeah. But atleast i know he cant kill me without destroying his precious ruby.

Unrelated question. But is it normal for red crystals to grow outta your body sometimes? I get them chipped off by Rusty but its abit weird.”

[extrondesignservice]

Get Top-notch Schematic Electronics Design, Development, & Repair Services!

In this period of technology, schematic electronics design is one of the most important parts of developing and building any electronic product. When a product design is developed by experts in electronic engineering, ensure the reliability of the product in addition to its functionality, and cost-effectiveness.

In the competitive landscape of electronic circuit board design, a recognised firm can deliver flawless circuit design and electronic repair services. These companies are experts in manufacturing, comprehensive support, leveraging decades of experience and cutting-edge software.

Their essential contributions help conserve resources and promote sustainability in an increasingly throwaway consumer electronics market.

Importance of Electronics Design, Development, and Repair Services:

Usually, skilled electronic experts provide clear and well-documented schematic capture and PCB design processes that reduce downstream errors, and costly recalls, and increase production efficiency. They are experts in component selection and forethought to avoid product shortages and maintain long-term viability.

Experienced circuit designers provide crucial help, from initial design to prototype and final product, in addition to delivering new solutions to stay ahead of the competition.

Their experience not only improves product quality, optimises manufacturing processes, and aids in competitive advantages in the fast-paced electronics business.

In addition to design and development, these professionals guarantee the longevity and functionality of electronic gadgets with a thorough understanding of circuits and components.

They can swiftly detect faulty PCBs or any other electronic issues promptly, and resolve them within minimal downtime and also help in extending product life to eliminate waste or resources.

Their understanding of schematic electronics design allows them to explore complex systems, discover root issues, and execute successful solutions.

How to Find a Trusted Design and Repair Service for Electronic Products?

Search online to find trusted electronic product design and development services.

Read their customer reviews and check successful project portfolios.

Contact them directly by email or calls to discuss your needs, execution period, and pricing; it also helps to gauge their customer response and service quality.

Finally, compare overall services in the market and select a trusted design and repair service suitable for your needs and benefit from improved performance, less downtime, and cost-effective upkeep.

Source: https://extrondesignservice.blogspot.com/2024/08/get-top-notch-schematic-electronics.html