We live in a world that becomes more dependent on technology every day. Tech gives us new ways to communicate, learn, work, and play, and recently it enabled us to reveal the appalling police brutality towards black people in the US by sharing the tragic murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Rayshard Brooks, and many others. While technology helps us shed light on these atrocities which catalyzes change, we also must realize the implicit discrimination that exists within technology itself.

我們生活在一個每天都越來越依賴技術的世界中。 科技為我們提供了交流，學習，工作和娛樂的新方式，最近，它使我們能夠分享喬治·弗洛伊德，布雷娜·泰勒，雷莎德·布魯克斯等人的悲慘謀殺案，從而揭示出警察對美國黑人的殘酷對待。 。 盡管技術可以幫助我們發現這些催化改變的暴行，但我們還必須意識到技術本身存在的隱性歧視。

There is a dangerous assumption that technology is neutral and unbiased, but the reality is that technology scales the biases and inequities of its creators. In her TED talk, mathematician Cathy O’Neil describes how people trust and fear mathematics, which leads them to trust and fear algorithms. However, she explains that “algorithms are just opinions embedded in code” and use historical performance to determine success and optimize for the future. In other words, if the algorithm’s formula is biased to begin with and it only defines success using past examples, the outcomes the algorithm produces and the decisions the algorithm makes will also be biased. O’Neil calls these flawed algorithms “weapons of math destruction”, and they are everywhere. These algorithms are determining the winners and losers in things like job applications, credit card offers, and insurance plans. This algorithmic discrimination reflects and reinforces the inequities, discrimination, and marginalization of the status quo.

有一個危險的假設，即技術是中性且無偏見的，但事實是技術會擴大其創造者的偏見和不平等。 在她的TED演講中，數學家Cathy O'Neil描述了人們如何信任和恐懼數學，從而使他們信任和恐懼算法。 但是，她解釋說“算法只是嵌入在代碼中的意見”，并使用歷史表現來確定成功并為未來進行優化。 換句話說，如果算法的公式從一開始就有偏見，并且僅使用過去的示例定義成功，則算法產生的結果以及算法做出的決策也將有偏見。 奧尼爾稱這些有缺陷的算法為“數學破壞武器”，它們無處不在。 這些算法確定了工作申請，信用卡優惠和保險計劃等方面的贏家和輸家。 這種算法上的歧視反映并加強了現狀的不平等，歧視和邊緣化。

User interfaces are moving away from traditional point-and-click (WIMP) input systems and more towards sensory inputs like gesture, speech, and facial recognition. This technology that is intended to make our lives easier (and many of us now take for granted) is prone to shocking and offensive errors when used by People of Color. There are gesture-based soap dispensers that don’t recognize darker skin tones, facial recognition that misgenders black women, photo filters that lighten skin tones to make the user “more attractive”, and speech recognition that disproportionately misunderstands black voices just to name a few. Some especially dangerous examples include police use of facial recognition systems that have a high rate of false-positive results with black women, predictive policing counterterrorism tools that use skin tone search technology, and object detectors’ failure to recognize pedestrians with darker skin tones.

用戶界面正從傳統的點擊(WIMP)輸入系統轉移到更多的手勢，語音和面部識別等感覺輸入上。 這項旨在使我們的生活更輕松的技術(現在很多人都認為理所當然)在有色人種使用時容易出現令人震驚和令人反感的錯誤。 有一些基于手勢的皂液器無法識別較深的膚色，面部識別會誤導黑人女性 ，照片過濾器會使膚色變淺以使用戶“更具吸引力” ，而語音識別會誤以為是誤以為是黑色語音。很少。 一些特別危險的例子包括警察使用面部識別系統對黑人婦女的假陽性率很高 ，使用膚色搜索技術的預測性警務反恐工具以及物體檢測器無法識別膚色較深的行人 。

This erasure and discrimination of BIPOC in technology is unacceptable, and a result of deeply seeded systemic issues across all industries. However, within the tech industry it’s painfully clear that BIPOC have simply been left out of the design process. Cheryl D. Holmes-Miller was the first to bring this to the public’s attention in her 1987 article, Black Designers: Missing in Action. Holmes-Miller described the various obstacles that black designers had to overcome if they were going to succeed in the field of graphic design. These obstacles included but were not limited to: lack of family support to pursue a design career, exorbitant tuition of design schools to gain the necessary qualifications and portfolio, lack of black mentors in the field to learn from and network with, and prejudice in the hiring process. Although there has been progress since 1987 in the fields of design and technology, we have a long way to go. The National Science Foundation reported that only 4.8% of the US STEM workforce in the US is black. With black lives and livelihoods on the line, it’s imperative to examine the systems in place that have hurt so many, and determine what changes must be made to ensure a more equitable future.

BIPOC在技術上的這種擦除和歧視是不可接受的，這是所有行業中根深蒂固的系統問題的結果。 但是，在技術行業中，令人痛苦的是，將BIPOC完全排除在設計過程之外。 謝麗爾·D·霍爾姆斯·米勒(Cheryl D. Holmes-Miller)在1987年的文章《 黑人設計師：行動中的失蹤》中首次引起了公眾的注意。 Holmes-Miller描述了黑人設計師要想在圖形設計領域取得成功就必須克服的各種障礙。 這些障礙包括但不限于：缺乏家庭支持以從事設計職業，設計學校的學費過高，無法獲得必要的資格和投資組合，缺乏在該領域學習和建立聯系的黑人導師，以及對職業的偏見。招聘過程。 盡管自1987年以來在設計和技術領域取得了進步，但我們還有很長的路要走。 美國國家科學基金會(National Science Foundation)報告說，在美國 ，只有4.8％的美國STEM員工是黑人 。 隨著黑人生活和生計的增加，迫切需要檢查對許多人造成傷害的現有系統，并確定必須進行哪些更改以確保更公平的未來。

我們是怎么來到這里的？ (How did we get here?)

We can look to history to help us understand the situation we find ourselves in today. Much of today’s design education and style can be attributed to the Bauhaus, which opened in Weimar, Germany in 1919. The Bauhaus began as a sort of radical political rebellion against communism, aiming to produce a “New Man” who blended art, craft, and technology and to create ubiquitous modern products and architecture that would revolutionize society and improve living conditions for all. This didn’t last long under Nazi regime, and the Bauhaus was forced to close in 1933. However, although the buildings shuttered, the Bauhaus’ modernism design movement spread all over the world. Bauhaus alum found new schools like the Ulm School and Black Mountain College and continued to teach the Bauhaus pedagogy. These schools prided themselves on being up on the (literal and figurative) mountaintops and given the freedom to design products for the future without the noise of the present. These modernist designs were intentionally divorced from their contexts in the name of ubiquity, and strictly favored minimalist aesthetics and affordability of production. Modernism was a homogenous design ideology that dismissed alternate design ideas as “visual pollution” and paid no attention to the various needs of users. The Ulm School of Design and Black Mountain College did not have a long tenure, but the modernist design movement has influenced design to this day.

我們可以回顧歷史，以幫助我們了解我們今天所處的局勢。 當今的大多數設計教育和風格都可歸因于1919年在德國魏瑪開業的包豪斯。包豪斯起初是對共產主義的激進政治叛亂，旨在產生一個融合了藝術，手Craft.io，和技術，并創造出無處不在的現代產品和建筑，將徹底改變社會并改善所有人的生活條件。 在納粹政權統治下，這種情況并沒有持續很長時間，包豪斯在1933年被迫關閉。但是，盡管建筑物關閉了，但包豪斯的現代主義設計運動遍布世界各地。 包豪斯校友找到了烏爾姆學校和黑山學院等新學校，并繼續教授包豪斯教學法。 這些學校以登上(文字和象征)山頂而自豪，并給予了自由設計未來產品的自由，而沒有當下的喧囂。 這些現代主義設計以普遍存在的名義故意脫離其上下文，并嚴格支持極簡主義美學和生產能力。 現代主義是同質的設計意識形態，它把替代設計思想視為“視覺污染”，而沒有關注用戶的各種需求。 烏爾姆設計學院和黑山學院的任期并不長，但是現代主義設計運動影響了當今的設計。

Because of places like the Bauhaus and Ulm School, designers were perceived as mysterious, aloof craftspeople who possessed some sort of magic genius they used to solve problems. The traditional design theory canon consists of ideas published by scholars of several backgrounds, in an effort to legitimize design as an academic discipline. Christopher Alexander, American architect, published Notes on the Synthesis of Form in 1964 in an effort to elevate design by providing a sort of scientific method that breaks design problems into subsystems in order to achieve fit between form and context. In 1968 cognitive scientist Herbert Simon proposed design as an intellectual matter of structuring problems for bounded rationality in his book The Sciences of the Artificial. However, in 1973 design theorists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber argued that human problems are “wicked problems” that cannot be so neatly structured, defined, evaluated, or controlled in their paper Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. 14 years later in 1987, Peter Rowe built off the idea of “wicked problems” and was the first to propose “Design Thinking”. Rowe rejected his predecessor’s categorization of design as a science and rather considered design as a mindset. In 1992, Richard Buchanan elaborated on the use of design thinking methods to address “wicked problems”. However, Design Thinking didn’t enter the mainstream until Tim Brown, the CEO of IDEO, published a paper about how the firm had adopted Design Thinking as a “human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer’s toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success”.

由于包豪斯(Bauhaus)和烏爾姆(Ulm)學校等地方的存在，設計師被認為是神秘的，超然的手Craft.io人，他們擁有某種用來解決問題的魔術天才。 傳統的設計理論規范由不同背景的學者發表的思想組成，旨在使設計合法化為一門學科。 美國建筑師克里斯托弗·亞歷山大(Christopher Alexander)于1964年發布了《形式綜合注釋》，旨在通過提供一種將設計問題分解為子系統的科學方法來提升設計水平，從而實現形式與上下文之間的契合。 1968年，認知科學家赫伯特?西蒙(Herbert Simon)在他的“人工神經科學”一書中提出了作為有限理性構造問題的智力知識。 然而，在1973年，設計理論家Horst Rittel和Melvin Webber認為，人類問題是“邪惡的問題”，在其《 一般規劃理論 》的“困境”中不能如此整潔地構造，定義，評估或控制人類問題。 14年后的1987年，彼得·羅(Peter Rowe)建立了“邪惡的問題”概念，并率先提出了“設計思維”。 Rowe拒絕了他的前任將設計分類為一門科學，而是將設計視為一種思維定式。 1992年，Richard Buchanan闡述了使用設計思維方法解決“邪惡問題”的方法。 但是，直到IDEO首席執行官蒂姆·布朗(Tim Brown)發表有關公司如何將設計思維作為“以人為本的創新方法，并從設計師的工具包中汲取靈感以整合設計需求”的論文之前，設計思維才進入主流。人員，技術的可能性以及業務成功的要求”。

This movement to define “design” has resulted in a limited and rigid view of what is “good design”, who is a “designer” and what processes design should follow. Design Thinking has permeated across industries and reached a new level of sacred ubiquity. It’s simple, approachable, and catchy: a simple 5-stage process (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test) produces innovative human-centered results.

定義“設計”的運動導致對什么是“好的設計”，誰是“設計者”以及設計應遵循的流程的局限性和僵化的看法。 設計思維已經滲透到各個行業，并達到了普遍存在的新高度。 它簡單，易上手且引人注目：一個簡單的5階段過程(賦權，定義，構思，原型，測試)可產生創新的以人為本的結果。

However, the solutionistic “innovation” it promises is inherently biased through the lens of the designer and must be approved and funded by those already in power. Designers are encouraged to connect with end-users in the first “Empathize” stage, but designers get oversimplified, incomplete, biased “understandings” of a design space that they move forward with at full-speed, leaving the users behind in the dust. Ultimately, design teams make the decisions about the framing of the design problems and designers get to choose what and who to scope out of the project.

但是，它所承諾的解決方案“創新”在設計者的眼中固有地存在偏差，必須由已經執政的人批準和資助。 鼓勵設計師在第一個“ Empathize”階段與最終用戶聯系，但是設計師對他們全速前進的設計空間過于簡單，不完整，有偏見的“理解”，使用戶陷入困境。 最終，設計團隊做出有關設計問題框架的決策，設計師可以選擇項目范圍內的對象和對象。

設計師可以做什么？ (What can designers do?)

Because many systemic issues exist outside the realm of design and are rooted in the constraints of a capitalist society based on colonial oppression, it would be difficult to achieve wildly different design outcomes without first addressing issues in the larger systems (such as government, economy, legal, education, healthcare, food, etc). Speculative and discursive design begins to imagine alternate futures through design, and although these projects may not be immediately feasible they afford the opportunity to discuss how things could be and compare to the current state of things.

由于許多系統性問題存在于設計領域之外，并且根植于基于殖民主義壓迫的資本主義社會的制約之下，因此，如果不首先解決較大系統中的問題(例如政府，經濟，法律，教育，醫療保健，食品等)。 投機性和話語性設計開始通過設計來設想替代的未來，盡管這些項目可能并非立即可行，但它們為討論事物的發展并與事物的當前狀態進行比較提供了機會。

DesignX is an ideology and community committed to working with complex socio-technical issues that deal with problems that are oversimplified, weren’t well-designed for humans, involve multiple disciplines with incompatible constraints, have non-obvious relationships and have long feedback loops. There is no prescriptive process to “solve” a DesignX problem, but it must heavily rely on co-ownership and co-design between stakeholders. The idea is to “muddle through” by making small, incremental changes that contribute towards a larger set of goals. People often don’t have strong opinions about little changes, and therefore these changes often get approved. Small changes also have more room for testing and failure without compromising the entire effort. While incremental change may be less sexy than a complete redesign, at least some progress gets made.

DesignX是一個意識形態和社區，致力于處理復雜的社會技術問題，這些問題處理的問題過于簡單，針對人類的設計欠佳，涉及多個學科且具有不兼容的約束，關系不明顯且反饋回路長。 沒有“解決” DesignX問題的說明性過程，但它必須在很大程度上依賴于利益相關者之間的共同所有權和共同設計。 這個想法是通過進行小的，漸進的更改來“混搭”，這些更改有助于實現更大的目標集。 人們通常對微小的更改沒有強烈的意見，因此這些更改通常會得到批準。 較小的更改也有更多的測試和失敗空間，而不會影響整個工作。 盡管增量更改可能不如完整的重新設計那么吸引人，但至少取得了一些進展。

There have also been incremental improvements to the Design Thinking process that attempt to address some of its blind spots.

設計思維過程也進行了逐步改進，以嘗試解決其某些盲點。

Liberatory Design is a collaboration between the Stanford d.school and and The National Equity Project. The Liberatory Design process is an adaptation of traditional Design Thinking that adds two phases that promote self-reflection in the designers, Notice and Reflect, to the design process. The Notice phase is about helping designers develop self-awareness about their identities, values, emotions, biases, and assumptions at the very beginning of the project. If designers can recognize their own lenses through which they view the world, they are more likely to question assumptions and stereotypes that these lenses provide. The Reflect stage should happen throughout the design process, and is about taking an “Equity Pause” for designers to think about their own actions, emotions, insights, and impacts as humans. These moments of reflection give opportunities to identify possible mistakes and oversights, and make changes to the project accordingly.

自由設計是斯坦福大學和國家公平項目之間的合作。 自由設計過程是對傳統設計思想的改編，它在設計過程中增加了兩個階段，以促進設計師的自我反思，即“注意”和“反思”。 公告階段旨在幫助設計師在項目開始時就其身份，價值觀，情感，偏見和假設建立自我意識。 如果設計人員可以識別自己的視角，從而更容易質疑這些鏡頭所提供的假設和定型觀念。 反思階段應該在整個設計過程中進行，并且要采取“平等暫停”的方式，讓設計師思考自己作為人類的行為，情感，見解和影響。 這些反思的時刻提供了機會來識別可能的錯誤和疏忽，并相應地對項目進行更改。

Equity-Centered Community Design (ECCD) is a framework published by the Creative Reaction Lab. ECCD aims to create a highly inclusive and participatory design process to co-create equity-centered communities. This process leans heavily into learning about a community’s culture, history, stakeholders and power structures to better understand the context and needs. ECCD provides a structure for discussing and dismantling systemic oppression, and actively resisting the status quo.

以公平為中心的社區設計(ECCD)是由Creative Reaction Lab發布的框架。 ECCD旨在創建一個高度包容性和參與性的設計流程，以共同創建以公平為中心的社區。 該過程主要依賴于了解社區的文化，歷史，利益相關者和權力結構，以便更好地了解背景和需求。 ECCD提供了一種討論和消除系統性壓迫并積極抵制現狀的結構。

These alternate frameworks are not nearly enough, but this incremental change could encourage designers to build awareness of themselves and the communities they’re designing in.

這些替代框架還遠遠不夠，但是這種漸進式的變化可能會鼓勵設計師提高對自己及其設計社區的認識。

What we really need are more BIPOC seats at the table. We need to remove obstacles, amplify voices, and extend opportunities wherever possible. We need to view diversity as an innovation strategy, not simply a buzzword or box to check. We can and must do better. Black lives matter.

我們真正需要的是有更多BIPOC席位。 我們需要消除障礙，擴大聲音，并盡可能擴大機會。 我們需要將多樣性視為一種創新策略，而不僅僅是一個時髦的詞語或需要檢查的方框。 我們可以而且必須做得更好。 黑人的命也是命。

參考書目(及建議讀物) (Bibliography (& Suggested Reading))

Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

亞歷山大·C·亞歷山大(1964)。 關于形式合成的注意事項。 馬薩諸塞州劍橋：哈佛大學出版社。

Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review. doi: 10.5040/9781474282932.0020

布朗，T。(2008)。 設計思維。 哈佛商業評論 。 doi：10.5040 / 9781474282932.0020

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5. doi: 10.2307/1511637

布坎南河(1992)。 設計思維中的邪惡問題。 設計問題 ， 8 (2)，5. doi：10.2307 / 1511637

Buolamwini, J. (2020, June 9). IBM Leads, More Should Follow: Racial Justice Requires Algorithmic Justice and Funding. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://medium.com/@Joy.Buolamwini/ibm-leads-more-should-follow-racial-justice-requires-algorithmic-justice-and-funding-da47e07e5b58

Buolamwini，J.(2020年6月9日)。 IBM領導，更多的應該遵循：種族正義需要算法正義和資金支持。 于2020年6月15日從https://medium.com/@Joy.Buolamwini/ibm-leads-more-should-follow-racial-justice-requires-algorithmic-justice-and-funding-da47e07e5b58檢索

Bushwick, S. (2019, December 27). How NIST Tested Facial Recognition Algorithms for Racial Bias. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nist-tested-facial-recognition-algorithms-for-racial-bias/

Bushwick，S.(2019年12月27日)。 NIST如何測試針對種族偏見的面部識別算法。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nist-tested-facial-recognition-algorithms-for-racial-bias/檢索

Buzon, D. (2020, May 28). Design Thinking is a Rebrand for White Supremacy. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://medium.com/@dabuzon/design-thinking-is-a-rebrand-for-white-supremacy-b3d31aa55831

Buzon，D.(2020年，5月28日)。 設計思維是白色至上的品牌重塑。 于2020年6月15日從https://medium.com/@dabuzon/design-thinking-is-a-rebrand-for-white-supremacy-b3d31aa55831檢索

Equity-Centered Community Design Field Guide. (2018). Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.creativereactionlab.com/our-approach

以權益為中心的社區設計領域指南。 (2018)。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.creativereactionlab.com/our-approach檢索

equityXdesign. (2016, November 15). Racism and inequity are products of design. They can be redesigned. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://medium.com/equity-design/racism-and-inequity-are-products-of-design-they-can-be-redesigned-12188363cc6a#.8hia4f29y

equityXdesign。 (2016年11月15日)。 種族主義和不平等是設計的產物。 可以重新設計它們。 于2020年6月15日從https://medium.com/equity-design/racism-and-inequity-are-products-of-design-they-be-be-re-designed-12188363cc6a#.8hia4f29y檢索

Forlano, L., Steenson, M. W., & Ananny, M. (2019). Bauhaus Futures. Cambridge: MIT Press.

弗蘭諾(Forlano，L。)，MW斯滕森(Steenson)和M.安妮(Ananny)(2019)。 包豪斯期貨 。 劍橋：麻省理工學院出版社。

Glantz, A., & Martinez, E. (2018, February 15). Modern-day redlining: Banks discriminate in lending. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.revealnews.org/article/for-people-of-color-banks-are-shutting-the-door-to-homeownership/

Glantz，A.＆Martinez，E.(2018年2月15日)。 現代重整：銀行在貸款方面存在歧視。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.revealnews.org/article/for-people-of-color-banks-are-shutting-the-door-to-homeownership/檢索

Holmes-Miller, C. D. (1987, June). Black Designers: Missing in Action. Retrieved from https://www.printmag.com/post/black-designers-missing-in-action-1987

Holmes-Miller，CD(1987年6月)。 黑人設計師：行動失蹤。 取自https://www.printmag.com/post/black-designers-missing-in-action-1987

Iskander, N. (2018, September 5). Design Thinking Is Fundamentally Conservative and Preserves the Status Quo. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2018/09/design-thinking-is-fundamentally-conservative-and-preserves-the-status-quo

北卡羅來納州伊斯坎德爾(2018年9月5日)。 設計思想從根本上是保守的，并保持現狀。 于2020年6月15日從https://hbr.org/2018/09/design-thinking-is-fundamentally-conservative-and-preserves-status-quo檢索

Jacob, H. (1988). HfG Ulm: A Personal View of an Experiment in Democracy and Design Education. Journal of Design History, 1(3 and 4), 221–234. doi: 10.1093/jdh/1.3_and_4.221

雅各布·H(1988)。 HfG Ulm：民主與設計教育實驗的個人觀點。 《設計史雜志》 ，第1卷 (第3和第4期)，221–234。 doi：10.1093 / jdh / 1.3_and_4.221

Joseph, G., & Lipp, K. (2018, September 6). IBM Used NYPD Surveillance Footage to Develop Technology That Lets Police Search by Skin Color. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://theintercept.com/2018/09/06/nypd-surveillance-camera-skin-tone-search/

Joseph G.，＆Lipp K.(2018年9月6日)。 IBM使用NYPD監視素材開發了可讓警察按膚色搜索的技術。 于2020年6月15日從https://theintercept.com/2018/09/06/nypd-surveillance-camera-skin-tone-search/檢索

Kaye, K. (2020, June 13). IBM, Microsoft, and Amazon’s face recognition bans don’t go far enough. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.fastcompany.com/90516450/ibm-microsoft-and-amazons-face-recognition-bans-dont-go-far-enough

Kaye，K.(2020年，6月13日)。 IBM，微軟和亞馬遜的面部識別禁令還遠遠不夠。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.fastcompany.com/90516450/ibm-microsoft-and-amazons-face-recognition-bans-dont-go-far-enough檢索

Khandwala, A. (2019, June 5). What Does It Mean to Decolonize Design? Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/what-does-it-mean-to-decolonize-design/

Khandwala，A.(2019年6月5日)。 非設計化是什么意思？ 于2020年6月15日從https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/what-does-it-mean-to-decolonize-design/檢索

Liberatory Design. (2017, April 26). Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources-collections/liberatory-design

自由設計。 (2017年4月26日)。 于2020年6月15日從https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources-collections/liberatory-design檢索

McIlwain, C. (2020, June 3). Of course technology perpetuates racism. It was designed that way. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/03/1002589/technology-perpetuates-racism-by-design-simulmatics-charlton-mcilwain/

McIlwain，C.(2020年6月3日)。 當然，技術使種族主義永存。 它是按這種方式設計的。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/03/1002589/technology-perpetuates-racism-by-design-simulmatics-charlton-mcilwain/檢索

Miller, M. (2016, November 10). What Designers Should Do Now. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.fastcompany.com/3065502/what-designers-should-do-now

Miller，M.(2016年11月10日)。 設計師現在應該做什么。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.fastcompany.com/3065502/what-designers-should-do-now檢索

Miller, M. (2017, February 16). Want To Fight Inequality? Forget Design Thinking. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.fastcompany.com/3068235/want-to-fight-inequality-forget-design-thinking

Miller，M.(2017年2月16日)。 想與不平等作斗爭嗎？ 忘記設計思維。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.fastcompany.com/3068235/want-to-fight-inequality-forget-design-thinking檢索

Namer, L. (2020, June 8). Anti-racist reading list for designers. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://uxdesign.cc/anti-racist-reading-list-for-designers-e51b3ac4bd0

Namer，L.(2020年6月8日)。 設計師的反種族閱讀清單。 于2020年6月15日從https://uxdesign.cc/anti-racist-reading-list-for-designers-e51b3ac4bd0檢索

Norman, D. A., & Stappers, P. J. (2015). DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(2), 83–106. doi: 10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002

諾曼(Norman，DA)和Stappers，PJ(2015)。 DesignX：復雜的社會技術系統。 佘Ji：設計，經濟與創新雜志 ， 1 (2)，83–106。 doi：10.1016 / j.sheji.2016.01.002

ONeil, C. (2017, April). Retrieved June 16, 2020, from https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_faith_in_big_data_must_end/transcript?language=en

ONeil，C.(2017年4月)。 于2020年6月16日從https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_faith_in_big_data_must_end/transcript?language=en檢索

Riggins, J. (2019, June 5). How to Get More People of Color to Join (and Stay) in Tech. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://thenewstack.io/how-to-get-more-people-of-color-to-join-and-stay-in-tech/

Riggins，J.(2019年6月5日)。 如何吸引更多有色人種加入(并留在科技界)。 于2020年6月15日從https://thenewstack.io/how-to-get-more-people-of-color-to-join-and-stay-in-tech/檢索

Riggins, J. (2020, June 4). Black Lives Matter: How the Tech Community Can Provide Support. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://thenewstack.io/black-lives-matter-how-the-tech-community-can-provide-support/

Riggins，J.(2020年6月4日)。 黑色生活至關重要：技術社區如何提供支持。 于2020年6月15日從https://thenewstack.io/black-lives-matter-how-the-tech-community-can-provide-support/檢索

Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. doi: 10.1007/bf01405730

Rittel，HWJ，＆Webber，MM(1973)。 一般規劃理論中的難題。 政策科學 ， 4 (2)，155–169。 doi：10.1007 / bf01405730

Rosner, D. (2018). Critical fabulations: reworking the methods and margins of design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Rosner，D.(2018年)。 關鍵的虛構：重新設計方法和設計余量 。 馬薩諸塞州劍橋市：麻省理工學院出版社。

Rubin, M. A., & Rowe, P. (1990). Design Thinking. Journal of Architectural Education (1984-), 43(3), 45. doi: 10.2307/1425075

馬薩諸塞州的魯賓(Rubin，MA)和羅(Rowe)(1990)。 設計思維。 建筑教育學報(1984-) ， 43 (3)，45. doi：10.2307 / 1425075

Simon, H. A. (1968). The Science of the Artificial. London: MIT Press.

西蒙，醫管局(1968)。 人工神經科學 。 倫敦：麻省理工學院出版社。

Some essential reading and research on race and technology. (2020, June 2). Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://venturebeat.com/2020/06/02/some-essential-reading-and-research-on-race-and-technology/amp/?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR1mP_5y1oJQKj851rCKSYeAGfPXSFlYQpBOZKVnbB-mLwx_k4IB3KaCwNU

關于種族和技術的一些重要閱讀和研究。 (2020年6月2日)。 于2020年6月15日從https://venturebeat.com/2020/06/02/some-essential-reading-and-research-on-race-and-technology/amp/中檢索？

Staton, Brooke & Kramer, Julia & Gordon, Pierce & Valdez, Lauren. (2016). From the Technical to the Political: Democratizing Design Thinking. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from http://contested-cities.net/working-papers/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2016/07/WPCC-165008-StatonKramerGordonValdez-FromTechnicalToPolitical.pdf

Staton，Brooke和Kramer，Julia和Gordon，Pierce和Valdez，Lauren。 (2016)。 從技術到政治：民主化設計思維。 于2020年6月15日從http://contested-cities.net/working-papers/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2016/07/WPCC-165008-StatonKramerGordonValdez-FromTechnicalToPolitical.pdf檢索

Valentino-devries, J. (2020, January 12). How the Police Use Facial Recognition, and Where It Falls Short. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/12/technology/facial-recognition-police.html

Valentino-devries，J.(2020年1月12日)。 警察如何使用面部識別，以及不足之處。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/12/technology/facial-recognition-police.html檢索

Why is graphic design 93% white? (1991, April 5). Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://www.aiga.org/why-is-graphic-design-93-percent-white-diversity

為什么圖形設計有93％是白色？ (1991年4月5日)。 于2020年6月15日從https://www.aiga.org/why-is-graphic-design-93-percent-white-diversity檢索