Andrea Margiovanni .it
Home / Technology, attention, humanism

Technology, attention, humanism

The 'user engagement' frame is a moral lens that looks neutral. It isn't. Digital products shape attention, and attention is the raw material of citizenship. This is the index page.

What follows is my reading of the relationship between technology and attention, with references to the essays I’ve written. It isn’t an anti-digital nostalgia: it’s the conviction that ignoring the civic dimension of the products we build is professional negligence.

Last revised: 7 May 2026.


Thesis, in one sentence

Digital products shape citizens before they shape customers. Designing them without accounting for this is a political choice dressed up as a design choice.

Everything that follows is the reasoning behind that sentence.

How I see it

  • Attention isn’t an unlimited resource the user “donates”. It is a finite quantity that gets extracted. The right verb changes the moral judgment.
  • “We’re not a newspaper” isn’t a defence. It was one in 2010. Today, any platform with a feed has de facto editorial obligations — and pretending otherwise is more insidious than acknowledging them.
  • Design is ethics made tangible. Every default you propose, every friction you remove, every animation you add, says something about what you consider acceptable to do with your users’ lives. There are no neutral choices, only unconscious ones.

Essays on this topic

27.05 2026
№ 69

The Human Is a Stance

I am an atheist, I come from philosophy, I work in European compliance. Leo XIV's first encyclical on artificial intelligence is not something I signed, it is something I argued with. And I found in it a vocabulary that Brussels still lacks.

10′ reading time
2,096 words
Read →
08.05 2026
№ 66

I Say No at Night, I Use the Same Tools in the Morning

At night I say no to my three-year-old who wants the tablet for a little longer. I say it for one specific reason, and from that reason a free book was born.

8′ reading time
1,727 words
Read →
01.05 2026
№ 61

The Specification Debt

On why the document that certifies the system ages worse than the code that implements it, and why the next generation of civil software-liability cases will be fought over the specification.

19′ reading time
4.420 words
Read →
29.04 2026
№ 60

The Shape the Day Lost

There's a diffuse tiredness we don't know how to name. It doesn't come from doing more: it comes from living inside a time that has lost its shape. AI doesn't speed the activity up — it replaces it with another, and the body, calibrated over years, can no longer read the day.

7′ reading time
1.310 words
Read →
27.04 2026
№ 59

The Shape of Constraint

Treating regulatory compliance as the adversary of the technical project means you haven't understood what the technical project is. An essay on the category error weakening Europe's software industry — and on how the European framework, read as a system rather than as a list, configures a structural competitive advantage for those who learn to inhabit it.

16′ reading time
3.842 words
Read →
21.04 2026
№ 58

DPIA as a Genre, Not a Form

The EDPB's DPIA template, released in April, isn't a longer form. It codifies a form. On the shift from module to genre, and what changes for anyone who writes compliance as continuous writing practice.

26′ reading time
6.514 words
Read →
19.04 2026
№ 57

Cruft, Not Patina

Buildings learn, Stewart Brand argued. Software, instead, accumulates comments that apologize. On why digital objects can't grow old — and what that says about the civilization that has put them at its center.

23′ reading time
5.180 words
Read →
18.04 2026
№ 56

Mrs. Donoghue's Last Bottle

Why the «product» on which modern liability law is built no longer exists in contemporary software — and what we might put in its place.

30′ reading time
7.401 words
Read →
17.04 2026
№ 55

The Last Gasp and AI's First Problem

Agents do more work, but we work more too. The real bottleneck isn’t productivity: it’s the body—sleep, limits, and finite time.

9′ reading time
1.949 words
Read →
28.03 2026
№ 50

Incompetence as a Structural Condition of the Present

Nobody knows what they’re doing—not as a cliché, but as a structural fact: our technical systems are now too complex for any single person to understand.

12′ reading time
2.707 words
Read →
27.03 2026
№ 49

Most software that exists shouldn't exist at all

And the people who build it for a living are the last to admit it.

8′ reading time
1.676 words
Read →
26.03 2026
№ 48

Your kids are not your users

A manifesto for people who build tech and are also parents: on engagement, attention extraction, and a simple rule—build as if your child were the user.

8′ reading time
1.865 words
Read →
25.03 2026
№ 47

Progress Is Not a Direction: Anatomy of a Dangerous Misconception

When people shout that the state is "holding back progress," are they really talking about progress: or something else entirely?

29′ reading time
6.442 words
Read →
17.03 2026
№ 43

After the Death of the UI: Does the Idea of the App Die Too?

Reading Mircha made me wonder what happens if the UI really dies. Maybe it’s not just the screen that disappears, but the application itself.

9′ reading time
1.901 words
Read →
21.02 2026
№ 24

Europe Says Enough: Your Brain Is Not a KPI

The DSA targets TikTok's infinite scroll and the "autopilot" of attention. Meanwhile in the U.S., Meta goes on trial. Design becomes politics.

9′ reading time
1,960 words
Read →
04.02 2026
№ 18

Who Controls What AI Agents Produce?

There's a question that has been turning in my head for weeks—the kind that arrives at eleven at night when you're going back over everything that was produced during the day. The question is simple, almost banal: how do we govern what we can no longer read?

8′ reading time
1,790 words
Read →
09.01 2026
№ 12

AI and the Vicious Cycle That Risks Killing Open Source

There's a sentence from Adam Wathan that struck me, that I've been thinking about for two days since he posted it.

11′ reading time
2,200 words
Read →
08.01 2026
№ 11

When Truth Becomes a Process

There's a precise moment I realised something had broken in my relationship with knowledge.

13′ reading time
2,600 words
Read →
03.01 2026
№ 10

The End of Twitter's Trust and Safety Council: When the Controls Disappear

I've noticed that lately, when I think about Twitter—or X, as I should call it now—I get the feeling you get when you go back to a place you loved and don't recognise it anymore.

12′ reading time
2,500 words
Read →
17.12 2025
№ 2

Ethics as a Compass for AI: When Human Values Become Business Value

AI is becoming part of daily life almost without our noticing. The interesting part isn't that it's a technology question—it's that it's also, increasingly, a business question.

6′ reading time
1,360 words
Read →

Work with me

The value here isn’t giving you more sophisticated dark patterns: it’s showing you, from inside your product data, which defaults you’re proposing and what they say about your civic project. Then you decide.

Who it's for

  • Heads of Product and Design looking at their own metrics with growing discomfort

  • Executive teams noticing that the ‘engagement = value’ narrative no longer holds, internally or externally

  • Teams building products for minors, families, vulnerable audiences, who want a product ethics stronger than policy

  • Boards wanting a keynote or workshop that isn’t a motivational TED talk

How I work

Engagement pattern review (2–3 weeks)

I look at your current patterns (notifications, feeds, onboarding, gamification) and tell you which are defensible and which aren’t — before a judge, before an adult user, before a ten-year-old. Output: a priority list of changes, with impact estimates.

Alternative metric design (3–4 weeks)

From engagement to received value. I work with product and analytics teams to build 2–3 metrics that measure the good the product does for users, not just the time they surrender.

Keynotes and internal workshops (1–2 days)

40-minute talks or 2–4 hour workshops for boards, product teams, design teams. Published references, no generic slides, operational output expected by the end.

Engagement FAQ

Is this an ideological stance?

No — it’s a professional stance. I’ve seen too many products extract attention without returning proportional value. Saying ‘it’s the market’ doesn’t explain; it just describes.

Does it apply to B2B products?

Yes. Dark patterns in enterprise SaaS exist — billing pages, cancellation flows, forced onboarding — and they’re more expensive because they erode the trust of a paying customer.

How long does a typical engagement last?

Two to four weeks for reviews or metric design, one to two days for keynotes and workshops.

Do you speak on stage?

Yes, for non-sponsored, non-promotional events. No recorded webinars or talks with sponsors masking a pitch.

Email me at hello@margiovanni.it with a couple of lines of context. I reply within a few business days with a concrete proposal, or a polite no if it's not my scope.

Questions & answers

Isn't it late to talk about the attention economy?

It’s late to discover it: it isn’t late to govern it. The difference is that we now have ten years of data on what happens when it’s left alone. It was theory in 2015; in 2026 it’s documentation.

Why invoke humanism?

Because the question ‘which citizen do we want to shape’ is older and more serious than ‘which user do we want to acquire’. Humanism gives us a vocabulary for asking the first without slipping into nostalgia.

© 2026 Andrea Margiovanni Made with care, by hand