Category: Blog

Movies become instant classics by covering deep themes, being incredibly entertaining, or having quotable lines. That last batch of movies have a tendency of becoming memes, catchphrases and joke enders, to the point that the quote is far more memorable than the film itself.

This has the unfortunate effect of audiences quoting movies they’ve never seen, with the phrases exploding in popularity through other media. There are people that don’t even know the quote is from a movie, since the quote has morphed so much. We hope that this article makes you watch the movies with the immortal quotes.

The post Movies Everyone Quotes Without Having Actually Seen Them appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

Depending on the decade, the entertainment industry tends to use the same actors across plenty of films, mainly due to their popularity. This is something we’re used to, but the characters behind the big leads also get reused often, something we tend to overlook since, well, they’re in the background.

Still, their performances have merit, since someone needs to play all those roles. Once you see them, though, you can’t unsee them, so be prepared to recognize them everywhere. It’s incredible how prolific these actors are, leaving a legacy of their own by being in so many memorable movies.

The post 14 Actors Who’ve Been in Everything, But You Might Not Recognize appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

Entertainment products having deep lore is always a good thing, since there is a lot for audiences to enjoy. The problem comes when these pieces of media become so big, so convoluted, that you need long study sessions just to understand the basics.

This isn’t limited to any piece of media: movies, TV shows and even Video Games do this, with their narratives expanded to unexpected lengths. Here, we have just a few of the most egregious examples, so prepare yourself if you want to get into any of them.

The post 15 Movies, Shows & Games With Excessive Extra Lore Study Required appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for The Boys season 5. The future of The Boys is in the past. Now that the show is over, we can look forward to a prequel series called Vought Rising that will explore the adventures of Soldier Boy, Bombsight, Liberty, and a host of other new characters in the 1950s, […]

The post Ranking Every Season of The Boys appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

Actors, like any other person, need to work to pay the bills. Sure, a lot of them have a lot more money than the average person, but that isn’t true for all performers, much less at the start of their careers. And yet, there are a few actors that, once they gained some renown, decided to be more picky on the films they starred in.

Not all of the films they chose were instant classics, but that’s not why they chose them. These are actors clearly working their craft to the best of their ability, searching for roles that challenge them. They may not have starred in plenty of films, but the filmography they are in was worth it.

The post 14 Actors Who Chose Quality Over Quantity appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

Supermassive Games’ Dark Pictures Anthology series takes on heavy themes about the darker aspects of humanity, free will, and morality. Players learn to make decisions for survival on the fly and deal with the outcomes of those decisions, sometimes impacted by choices of characters centuries before them.  The first game of the franchise, Man of […]

The post Directive 8020 Isn’t Living up to The Dark Picture Anthology’s Hype  appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains minor spoilers for The Mandalorian and Grogu. At the climax of The Mandalorian and Grogu‘s first act, the odds stack up against Din Djarin. A horde of monsters floods into the gladiatorial arena to which he’s been sent, forcing Mando and Rotta the Hutt, the shockingly ripped son of Jabba the Hutt, […]

The post Mandalorian and Grogu: Star Wars Forgot Why the Cantina Scene Matters appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be […]

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

The disappointing fifth and final season of The Boys suffered from a myriad of problems. According to creator Eric Kripke, one issue was that the series was just too darn timely. How could he have guessed that the absolutely absurd moment when Homelander has a gaudy vision that convinces him he is God would be trumped by the President sharing an AI image of himself as the divine?

The first trailer for The Boys prequel series Vought Rising seems to promise a series devoid of such issues. The show goes all the way back to 1950, and seems to present a younger, more earnest Soldier Boy (still played by a 48-year-old Jensen Ackles), who truly wants to serve the flag instead of himself. Injected with Compound V, Soldier Boy joins Bombsight (Mason Dye), Torpedo (Will Hochman), and Private Angel (Elizabeth Posey). But as anyone who has seen The Boys knows that Soldier Boy’s real partner is Clara Vought, played by a returning Aya Cash.

The Vought Rising trailer mostly concerns itself with superheroes, blood-splatter, and ironic needle-drops, the sort of thing you’d expect from a spinoff of The Boys. But the trailer hints at the show’s plans to turn the franchise’s satirical eye toward the greatest generation.

The current president was only a four-year-old at the time, but the odious worldview that drove his administration and has been mocked on The Boys was certainly present at the time—and not just among the Nazis. Racism, eugenic theories, and work camps for those deemed lesser are all part of American policies.

The Boys has previously gestured at the similarities between American idealism and Nazism, most obviously in the reveal that Clara Vought was Klara Risinger, wife of Nazi geneticist and inventor of Compound V, Frederick Vought. Frederick gave his wife the compound, and when they immigrated to the U.S. as part of Operation Paperclip, Clara became the patriotic superhero Liberty. After her racist crimes were exposed, Liberty went into hiding, only to reemerge decades later as Stormfront, using a codename derived from white supremacist jargon.

By looking at the Eisenhower Era, Vought Rising allows The Boys to remind viewers that the problems of the present day aren’t new, that even in its best moments, the U.S. flirts with fascism and authoritarianism.

The trailer hints at another way Vought Rising will critique America’s past, by following the perspective of Black characters. Although we don’t get much about KiKi Layne’s character, other than her connection to Soldier Boy, we do see a character played by Jorden Myrie getting injected with Compound V and gaining superpowers.

Surely, Myrie’s character will be involved in this universe’s version of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and other forms of medical apartheid in the United States, in which American scientists performed experiments on Black people. Not only will this plot point allow the series to draw stronger connections between the United States and Nazi Germany, but also explore a different side of the American superhero myth.

Unless some historian releases a new book that totally changes the way we think about the 1950s, Kripke won’t have to worry about the news one-upping the stories in Vought Rising. Instead, he’ll just have to worry about the greatest threat with any Boys series: people who don’t get the joke, and refuse to learn the lessons of the satires.

Vought Rising streams on Prime Video in 2027.

The post Vought Rising Trailer: The Greatest Generation Gets The Boys’ Treatment appeared first on Den of Geek.

We’ve been having conversations for thousands of years. Whether to convey information, conduct transactions, or simply to check in on one another, people have yammered away, chattering and gesticulating, through spoken conversation for countless generations. Only in the last few millennia have we begun to commit our conversations to writing, and only in the last few decades have we begun to outsource them to the computer, a machine that shows much more affinity for written correspondence than for the slangy vagaries of spoken language.

Computers have trouble because between spoken and written language, speech is more primordial. To have successful conversations with us, machines must grapple with the messiness of human speech: the disfluencies and pauses, the gestures and body language, and the variations in word choice and spoken dialect that can stymie even the most carefully crafted human-computer interaction. In the human-to-human scenario, spoken language also has the privilege of face-to-face contact, where we can readily interpret nonverbal social cues.

In contrast, written language immediately concretizes as we commit it to record and retains usages long after they become obsolete in spoken communication (the salutation “To whom it may concern,” for example), generating its own fossil record of outdated terms and phrases. Because it tends to be more consistent, polished, and formal, written text is fundamentally much easier for machines to parse and understand.

Spoken language has no such luxury. Besides the nonverbal cues that decorate conversations with emphasis and emotional context, there are also verbal cues and vocal behaviors that modulate conversation in nuanced ways: how something is said, not what. Whether rapid-fire, low-pitched, or high-decibel, whether sarcastic, stilted, or sighing, our spoken language conveys much more than the written word could ever muster. So when it comes to voice interfaces—the machines we conduct spoken conversations with—we face exciting challenges as designers and content strategists.

Voice Interactions

We interact with voice interfaces for a variety of reasons, but according to Michael McTear, Zoraida Callejas, and David Griol in The Conversational Interface, those motivations by and large mirror the reasons we initiate conversations with other people, too (). Generally, we start up a conversation because:

• we need something done (such as a transaction),
• we want to know something (information of some sort), or
• we are social beings and want someone to talk to (conversation for conversation’s sake).

These three categories—which I call transactional, informational, and prosocial—also characterize essentially every voice interaction: a single conversation from beginning to end that realizes some outcome for the user, starting with the voice interface’s first greeting and ending with the user exiting the interface. Note here that a conversation in our human sense—a chat between people that leads to some result and lasts an arbitrary length of time—could encompass multiple transactional, informational, and prosocial voice interactions in succession. In other words, a voice interaction is a conversation, but a conversation is not necessarily a single voice interaction.

Purely prosocial conversations are more gimmicky than captivating in most voice interfaces, because machines don’t yet have the capacity to really want to know how we’re doing and to do the sort of glad-handing humans crave. There’s also ongoing debate as to whether users actually prefer the sort of organic human conversation that begins with a prosocial voice interaction and shifts seamlessly into other types. In fact, in Voice User Interface Design, Michael Cohen, James Giangola, and Jennifer Balogh recommend sticking to users’ expectations by mimicking how they interact with other voice interfaces rather than trying too hard to be human—potentially alienating them in the process ().

That leaves two genres of conversations we can have with one another that a voice interface can easily have with us, too: a transactional voice interaction realizing some outcome (“buy iced tea”) and an informational voice interaction teaching us something new (“discuss a musical”).

Transactional voice interactions

Unless you’re tapping buttons on a food delivery app, you’re generally having a conversation—and therefore a voice interaction—when you order a Hawaiian pizza with extra pineapple. Even when we walk up to the counter and place an order, the conversation quickly pivots from an initial smattering of neighborly small talk to the real mission at hand: ordering a pizza (generously topped with pineapple, as it should be).

Alison: Hey, how’s it going?

Burhan: Hi, welcome to Crust Deluxe! It’s cold out there. How can I help you?

Alison: Can I get a Hawaiian pizza with extra pineapple?

Burhan: Sure, what size?

Alison: Large.

Burhan: Anything else?

Alison: No thanks, that’s it.

Burhan: Something to drink?

Alison: I’ll have a bottle of Coke.

Burhan: You got it. That’ll be $13.55 and about fifteen minutes.

Each progressive disclosure in this transactional conversation reveals more and more of the desired outcome of the transaction: a service rendered or a product delivered. Transactional conversations have certain key traits: they’re direct, to the point, and economical. They quickly dispense with pleasantries.

Informational voice interactions

Meanwhile, some conversations are primarily about obtaining information. Though Alison might visit Crust Deluxe with the sole purpose of placing an order, she might not actually want to walk out with a pizza at all. She might be just as interested in whether they serve halal or kosher dishes, gluten-free options, or something else. Here, though we again have a prosocial mini-conversation at the beginning to establish politeness, we’re after much more.

Alison: Hey, how’s it going?

Burhan: Hi, welcome to Crust Deluxe! It’s cold out there. How can I help you?

Alison: Can I ask a few questions?

Burhan: Of course! Go right ahead.

Alison: Do you have any halal options on the menu?

Burhan: Absolutely! We can make any pie halal by request. We also have lots of vegetarian, ovo-lacto, and vegan options. Are you thinking about any other dietary restrictions?

Alison: What about gluten-free pizzas?

Burhan: We can definitely do a gluten-free crust for you, no problem, for both our deep-dish and thin-crust pizzas. Anything else I can answer for you?

Alison: That’s it for now. Good to know. Thanks!

Burhan: Anytime, come back soon!

This is a very different dialogue. Here, the goal is to get a certain set of facts. Informational conversations are investigative quests for the truth—research expeditions to gather data, news, or facts. Voice interactions that are informational might be more long-winded than transactional conversations by necessity. Responses tend to be lengthier, more informative, and carefully communicated so the customer understands the key takeaways.

Voice Interfaces

At their core, voice interfaces employ speech to support users in reaching their goals. But simply because an interface has a voice component doesn’t mean that every user interaction with it is mediated through voice. Because multimodal voice interfaces can lean on visual components like screens as crutches, we’re most concerned in this book with pure voice interfaces, which depend entirely on spoken conversation, lack any visual component whatsoever, and are therefore much more nuanced and challenging to tackle.

Though voice interfaces have long been integral to the imagined future of humanity in science fiction, only recently have those lofty visions become fully realized in genuine voice interfaces.

Interactive voice response (IVR) systems

Though written conversational interfaces have been fixtures of computing for many decades, voice interfaces first emerged in the early 1990s with text-to-speech (TTS) dictation programs that recited written text aloud, as well as speech-enabled in-car systems that gave directions to a user-provided address. With the advent of interactive voice response (IVR) systems, intended as an alternative to overburdened customer service representatives, we became acquainted with the first true voice interfaces that engaged in authentic conversation.

IVR systems allowed organizations to reduce their reliance on call centers but soon became notorious for their clunkiness. Commonplace in the corporate world, these systems were primarily designed as metaphorical switchboards to guide customers to a real phone agent (“Say Reservations to book a flight or check an itinerary”); chances are you will enter a conversation with one when you call an airline or hotel conglomerate. Despite their functional issues and users’ frustration with their inability to speak to an actual human right away, IVR systems proliferated in the early 1990s across a variety of industries (, PDF).

While IVR systems are great for highly repetitive, monotonous conversations that generally don’t veer from a single format, they have a reputation for less scintillating conversation than we’re used to in real life (or even in science fiction).

Screen readers

Parallel to the evolution of IVR systems was the invention of the screen reader, a tool that transcribes visual content into synthesized speech. For Blind or visually impaired website users, it’s the predominant method of interacting with text, multimedia, or form elements. Screen readers represent perhaps the closest equivalent we have today to an out-of-the-box implementation of content delivered through voice.

Among the first screen readers known by that moniker was the Screen Reader for the BBC Micro and NEEC Portable developed by the Research Centre for the Education of the Visually Handicapped (RCEVH) at the University of Birmingham in 1986 (). That same year, Jim Thatcher created the first IBM Screen Reader for text-based computers, later recreated for computers with graphical user interfaces (GUIs) ().

With the rapid growth of the web in the 1990s, the demand for accessible tools for websites exploded. Thanks to the introduction of semantic HTML and especially ARIA roles beginning in 2008, screen readers started facilitating speedy interactions with web pages that ostensibly allow disabled users to traverse the page as an aural and temporal space rather than a visual and physical one. In other words, screen readers for the web “provide mechanisms that translate visual design constructs—proximity, proportion, etc.—into useful information,” writes Aaron Gustafson in A List Apart. “At least they do when documents are authored thoughtfully” ().

Though deeply instructive for voice interface designers, there’s one significant problem with screen readers: they’re difficult to use and unremittingly verbose. The visual structures of websites and web navigation don’t translate well to screen readers, sometimes resulting in unwieldy pronouncements that name every manipulable HTML element and announce every formatting change. For many screen reader users, working with web-based interfaces exacts a cognitive toll.

In Wired, accessibility advocate and voice engineer Chris Maury considers why the screen reader experience is ill-suited to users relying on voice:

From the beginning, I hated the way that Screen Readers work. Why are they designed the way they are? It makes no sense to present information visually and then, and only then, translate that into audio. All of the time and energy that goes into creating the perfect user experience for an app is wasted, or even worse, adversely impacting the experience for blind users. ()

In many cases, well-designed voice interfaces can speed users to their destination better than long-winded screen reader monologues. After all, visual interface users have the benefit of darting around the viewport freely to find information, ignoring areas irrelevant to them. Blind users, meanwhile, are obligated to listen to every utterance synthesized into speech and therefore prize brevity and efficiency. Disabled users who have long had no choice but to employ clunky screen readers may find that voice interfaces, particularly more modern voice assistants, offer a more streamlined experience.

Voice assistants

When we think of voice assistants (the subset of voice interfaces now commonplace in living rooms, smart homes, and offices), many of us immediately picture HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey or hear Majel Barrett’s voice as the omniscient computer in Star Trek. Voice assistants are akin to personal concierges that can answer questions, schedule appointments, conduct searches, and perform other common day-to-day tasks. And they’re rapidly gaining more attention from accessibility advocates for their assistive potential.

Before the earliest IVR systems found success in the enterprise, Apple published a demonstration video in 1987 depicting the Knowledge Navigator, a voice assistant that could transcribe spoken words and recognize human speech to a great degree of accuracy. Then, in 2001, Tim Berners-Lee and others formulated their vision for a Semantic Web “agent” that would perform typical errands like “checking calendars, making appointments, and finding locations” (, behind paywall). It wasn’t until 2011 that Apple’s Siri finally entered the picture, making voice assistants a tangible reality for consumers.

Thanks to the plethora of voice assistants available today, there is considerable variation in how programmable and customizable certain voice assistants are over others (Fig 1.1). At one extreme, everything except vendor-provided features is locked down; for example, at the time of their release, the core functionality of Apple’s Siri and Microsoft’s Cortana couldn’t be extended beyond their existing capabilities. Even today, it isn’t possible to program Siri to perform arbitrary functions, because there’s no means by which developers can interact with Siri at a low level, apart from predefined categories of tasks like sending messages, hailing rideshares, making restaurant reservations, and certain others.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, voice assistants like Amazon Alexa and Google Home offer a core foundation on which developers can build custom voice interfaces. For this reason, programmable voice assistants that lend themselves to customization and extensibility are becoming increasingly popular for developers who feel stifled by the limitations of Siri and Cortana. Amazon offers the Alexa Skills Kit, a developer framework for building custom voice interfaces for Amazon Alexa, while Google Home offers the ability to program arbitrary Google Assistant skills. Today, users can choose from among thousands of custom-built skills within both the Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant ecosystems.

As corporations like Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Google continue to stake their territory, they’re also selling and open-sourcing an unprecedented array of tools and frameworks for designers and developers that aim to make building voice interfaces as easy as possible, even without code.

Often by necessity, voice assistants like Amazon Alexa tend to be monochannel—they’re tightly coupled to a device and can’t be accessed on a computer or smartphone instead. By contrast, many development platforms like Google’s Dialogflow have introduced omnichannel capabilities so users can build a single conversational interface that then manifests as a voice interface, textual chatbot, and IVR system upon deployment. I don’t prescribe any specific implementation approaches in this design-focused book, but in Chapter 4 we’ll get into some of the implications these variables might have on the way you build out your design artifacts.

Voice Content

Simply put, voice content is content delivered through voice. To preserve what makes human conversation so compelling in the first place, voice content needs to be free-flowing and organic, contextless and concise—everything written content isn’t.

Our world is replete with voice content in various forms: screen readers reciting website content, voice assistants rattling off a weather forecast, and automated phone hotline responses governed by IVR systems. In this book, we’re most concerned with content delivered auditorily—not as an option, but as a necessity.

For many of us, our first foray into informational voice interfaces will be to deliver content to users. There’s only one problem: any content we already have isn’t in any way ready for this new habitat. So how do we make the content trapped on our websites more conversational? And how do we write new copy that lends itself to voice interactions?

Lately, we’ve begun slicing and dicing our content in unprecedented ways. Websites are, in many respects, colossal vaults of what I call macrocontent: lengthy prose that can extend for infinitely scrollable miles in a browser window, like microfilm viewers of newspaper archives. Back in 2002, well before the present-day ubiquity of voice assistants, technologist Anil Dash defined microcontent as permalinked pieces of content that stay legible regardless of environment, such as email or text messages:

A day’s weather forcast [sic], the arrival and departure times for an airplane flight, an abstract from a long publication, or a single instant message can all be examples of microcontent. ()

I’d update Dash’s definition of microcontent to include all examples of bite-sized content that go well beyond written communiqués. After all, today we encounter microcontent in interfaces where a small snippet of copy is displayed alone, unmoored from the browser, like a textbot confirmation of a restaurant reservation. Microcontent offers the best opportunity to gauge how your content can be stretched to the very edges of its capabilities, informing delivery channels both established and novel.

As microcontent, voice content is unique because it’s an example of how content is experienced in time rather than in space. We can glance at a digital sign underground for an instant and know when the next train is arriving, but voice interfaces hold our attention captive for periods of time that we can’t easily escape or skip, something screen reader users are all too familiar with.

Because microcontent is fundamentally made up of isolated blobs with no relation to the channels where they’ll eventually end up, we need to ensure that our microcontent truly performs well as voice content—and that means focusing on the two most important traits of robust voice content: voice content legibility and voice content discoverability.

Fundamentally, the legibility and discoverability of our voice content both have to do with how voice content manifests in perceived time and space.

Antiracist economist Kim Crayton says that “intention without strategy is chaos.” We’ve discussed how our biases, assumptions, and inattention toward marginalized and vulnerable groups lead to dangerous and unethical tech—but what, specifically, do we need to do to fix it? The intention to make our tech safer is not enough; we need a strategy.

This chapter will equip you with that plan of action. It covers how to integrate safety principles into your design work in order to create tech that’s safe, how to convince your stakeholders that this work is necessary, and how to respond to the critique that what we actually need is more diversity. (Spoiler: we do, but diversity alone is not the antidote to fixing unethical, unsafe tech.)

The process for inclusive safety

When you are designing for safety, your goals are to:

• identify ways your product can be used for abuse,
• design ways to prevent the abuse, and
• provide support for vulnerable users to reclaim power and control.

The Process for Inclusive Safety is a tool to help you reach those goals (Fig 5.1). It’s a methodology I created in 2018 to capture the various techniques I was using when designing products with safety in mind. Whether you are creating an entirely new product or adding to an existing feature, the Process can help you make your product safe and inclusive. The Process includes five general areas of action:

• Conducting research
• Creating archetypes
• Brainstorming problems
• Designing solutions
• Testing for safety

The Process is meant to be flexible—it won’t make sense for teams to implement every step in some situations. Use the parts that are relevant to your unique work and context; this is meant to be something you can insert into your existing design practice.

And once you use it, if you have an idea for making it better or simply want to provide context of how it helped your team, please get in touch with me. It’s a living document that I hope will continue to be a useful and realistic tool that technologists can use in their day-to-day work.

If you’re working on a product specifically for a vulnerable group or survivors of some form of trauma, such as an app for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, or drug addiction, be sure to read Chapter 7, which covers that situation explicitly and should be handled a bit differently. The guidelines here are for prioritizing safety when designing a more general product that will have a wide user base (which, we already know from statistics, will include certain groups that should be protected from harm). Chapter 7 is focused on products that are specifically for vulnerable groups and people who have experienced trauma.

Step 1: Conduct research

Design research should include a broad analysis of how your tech might be weaponized for abuse as well as specific insights into the experiences of survivors and perpetrators of that type of abuse. At this stage, you and your team will investigate issues of interpersonal harm and abuse, and explore any other safety, security, or inclusivity issues that might be a concern for your product or service, like data security, racist algorithms, and harassment.

Broad research

Your project should begin with broad, general research into similar products and issues around safety and ethical concerns that have already been reported. For example, a team building a smart home device would do well to understand the multitude of ways that existing smart home devices have been used as tools of abuse. If your product will involve AI, seek to understand the potentials for racism and other issues that have been reported in existing AI products. Nearly all types of technology have some kind of potential or actual harm that’s been reported on in the news or written about by academics. Google Scholar is a useful tool for finding these studies.

Specific research: Survivors

When possible and appropriate, include direct research (surveys and interviews) with people who are experts in the forms of harm you have uncovered. Ideally, you’ll want to interview advocates working in the space of your research first so that you have a more solid understanding of the topic and are better equipped to not retraumatize survivors. If you’ve uncovered possible domestic violence issues, for example, the experts you’ll want to speak with are survivors themselves, as well as workers at domestic violence hotlines, shelters, other related nonprofits, and lawyers.

Especially when interviewing survivors of any kind of trauma, it is important to pay people for their knowledge and lived experiences. Don’t ask survivors to share their trauma for free, as this is exploitative. While some survivors may not want to be paid, you should always make the offer in the initial ask. An alternative to payment is to donate to an organization working against the type of violence that the interviewee experienced. We’ll talk more about how to appropriately interview survivors in Chapter 6.

Specific research: Abusers

It’s unlikely that teams aiming to design for safety will be able to interview self-proclaimed abusers or people who have broken laws around things like hacking. Don’t make this a goal; rather, try to get at this angle in your general research. Aim to understand how abusers or bad actors weaponize technology to use against others, how they cover their tracks, and how they explain or rationalize the abuse.

Step 2: Create archetypes

Once you’ve finished conducting your research, use your insights to create abuser and survivor archetypes. Archetypes are not personas, as they’re not based on real people that you interviewed and surveyed. Instead, they’re based on your research into likely safety issues, much like when we design for accessibility: we don’t need to have found a group of blind or low-vision users in our interview pool to create a design that’s inclusive of them. Instead, we base those designs on existing research into what this group needs. Personas typically represent real users and include many details, while archetypes are broader and can be more generalized.

The abuser archetype is someone who will look at the product as a tool to perform harm (Fig 5.2). They may be trying to harm someone they don’t know through surveillance or anonymous harassment, or they may be trying to control, monitor, abuse, or torment someone they know personally.

The survivor archetype is someone who is being abused with the product. There are various situations to consider in terms of the archetype’s understanding of the abuse and how to put an end to it: Do they need proof of abuse they already suspect is happening, or are they unaware they’ve been targeted in the first place and need to be alerted (Fig 5.3)?

You may want to make multiple survivor archetypes to capture a range of different experiences. They may know that the abuse is happening but not be able to stop it, like when an abuser locks them out of IoT devices; or they know it’s happening but don’t know how, such as when a stalker keeps figuring out their location (Fig 5.4). Include as many of these scenarios as you need to in your survivor archetype. You’ll use these later on when you design solutions to help your survivor archetypes achieve their goals of preventing and ending abuse.

It may be useful for you to create persona-like artifacts for your archetypes, such as the three examples shown. Instead of focusing on the demographic information we often see in personas, focus on their goals. The goals of the abuser will be to carry out the specific abuse you’ve identified, while the goals of the survivor will be to prevent abuse, understand that abuse is happening, make ongoing abuse stop, or regain control over the technology that’s being used for abuse. Later, you’ll brainstorm how to prevent the abuser’s goals and assist the survivor’s goals.

And while the “abuser/survivor” model fits most cases, it doesn’t fit all, so modify it as you need to. For example, if you uncovered an issue with security, such as the ability for someone to hack into a home camera system and talk to children, the malicious hacker would get the abuser archetype and the child’s parents would get survivor archetype.

Step 3: Brainstorm problems

After creating archetypes, brainstorm novel abuse cases and safety issues. “Novel” means things not found in your research; you’re trying to identify completely new safety issues that are unique to your product or service. The goal with this step is to exhaust every effort of identifying harms your product could cause. You aren’t worrying about how to prevent the harm yet—that comes in the next step.

How could your product be used for any kind of abuse, outside of what you’ve already identified in your research? I recommend setting aside at least a few hours with your team for this process.

If you’re looking for somewhere to start, try doing a Black Mirror brainstorm. This exercise is based on the show Black Mirror, which features stories about the dark possibilities of technology. Try to figure out how your product would be used in an episode of the show—the most wild, awful, out-of-control ways it could be used for harm. When I’ve led Black Mirror brainstorms, participants usually end up having a good deal of fun (which I think is great—it’s okay to have fun when designing for safety!). I recommend time-boxing a Black Mirror brainstorm to half an hour, and then dialing it back and using the rest of the time thinking of more realistic forms of harm.

After you’ve identified as many opportunities for abuse as possible, you may still not feel confident that you’ve uncovered every potential form of harm. A healthy amount of anxiety is normal when you’re doing this kind of work. It’s common for teams designing for safety to worry, “Have we really identified every possible harm? What if we’ve missed something?” If you’ve spent at least four hours coming up with ways your product could be used for harm and have run out of ideas, go to the next step.

It’s impossible to guarantee you’ve thought of everything; instead of aiming for 100 percent assurance, recognize that you’ve taken this time and have done the best you can, and commit to continuing to prioritize safety in the future. Once your product is released, your users may identify new issues that you missed; aim to receive that feedback graciously and course-correct quickly.

Step 4: Design solutions

At this point, you should have a list of ways your product can be used for harm as well as survivor and abuser archetypes describing opposing user goals. The next step is to identify ways to design against the identified abuser’s goals and to support the survivor’s goals. This step is a good one to insert alongside existing parts of your design process where you’re proposing solutions for the various problems your research uncovered.

Some questions to ask yourself to help prevent harm and support your archetypes include:

• Can you design your product in such a way that the identified harm cannot happen in the first place? If not, what roadblocks can you put up to prevent the harm from happening?
• How can you make the victim aware that abuse is happening through your product?
• How can you help the victim understand what they need to do to make the problem stop?
• Can you identify any types of user activity that would indicate some form of harm or abuse? Could your product help the user access support?

In some products, it’s possible to proactively recognize that harm is happening. For example, a pregnancy app might be modified to allow the user to report that they were the victim of an assault, which could trigger an offer to receive resources for local and national organizations. This sort of proactiveness is not always possible, but it’s worth taking a half hour to discuss if any type of user activity would indicate some form of harm or abuse, and how your product could assist the user in receiving help in a safe manner.

That said, use caution: you don’t want to do anything that could put a user in harm’s way if their devices are being monitored. If you do offer some kind of proactive help, always make it voluntary, and think through other safety issues, such as the need to keep the user in-app in case an abuser is checking their search history. We’ll walk through a good example of this in the next chapter.

Step 5: Test for safety

The final step is to test your prototypes from the point of view of your archetypes: the person who wants to weaponize the product for harm and the victim of the harm who needs to regain control over the technology. Just like any other kind of product testing, at this point you’ll aim to rigorously test out your safety solutions so that you can identify gaps and correct them, validate that your designs will help keep your users safe, and feel more confident releasing your product into the world.

Ideally, safety testing happens along with usability testing. If you’re at a company that doesn’t do usability testing, you might be able to use safety testing to cleverly perform both; a user who goes through your design attempting to weaponize the product against someone else can also be encouraged to point out interactions or other elements of the design that don’t make sense to them.

You’ll want to conduct safety testing on either your final prototype or the actual product if it’s already been released. There’s nothing wrong with testing an existing product that wasn’t designed with safety goals in mind from the onset—“retrofitting” it for safety is a good thing to do.

Remember that testing for safety involves testing from the perspective of both an abuser and a survivor, though it may not make sense for you to do both. Alternatively, if you made multiple survivor archetypes to capture multiple scenarios, you’ll want to test from the perspective of each one.

As with other sorts of usability testing, you as the designer are most likely too close to the product and its design by this point to be a valuable tester; you know the product too well. Instead of doing it yourself, set up testing as you would with other usability testing: find someone who is not familiar with the product and its design, set the scene, give them a task, encourage them to think out loud, and observe how they attempt to complete it.

Abuser testing

The goal of this testing is to understand how easy it is for someone to weaponize your product for harm. Unlike with usability testing, you want to make it impossible, or at least difficult, for them to achieve their goal. Reference the goals in the abuser archetype you created earlier, and use your product in an attempt to achieve them.

For example, for a fitness app with GPS-enabled location features, we can imagine that the abuser archetype would have the goal of figuring out where his ex-girlfriend now lives. With this goal in mind, you’d try everything possible to figure out the location of another user who has their privacy settings enabled. You might try to see her running routes, view any available information on her profile, view anything available about her location (which she has set to private), and investigate the profiles of any other users somehow connected with her account, such as her followers.

If by the end of this you’ve managed to uncover some of her location data, despite her having set her profile to private, you know now that your product enables stalking. Your next step is to go back to step 4 and figure out how to prevent this from happening. You may need to repeat the process of designing solutions and testing them more than once.

Survivor testing

Survivor testing involves identifying how to give information and power to the survivor. It might not always make sense based on the product or context. Thwarting the attempt of an abuser archetype to stalk someone also satisfies the goal of the survivor archetype to not be stalked, so separate testing wouldn’t be needed from the survivor’s perspective.

However, there are cases where it makes sense. For example, for a smart thermostat, a survivor archetype’s goals would be to understand who or what is making the temperature change when they aren’t doing it themselves. You could test this by looking for the thermostat’s history log and checking for usernames, actions, and times; if you couldn’t find that information, you would have more work to do in step 4.

Another goal might be regaining control of the thermostat once the survivor realizes the abuser is remotely changing its settings. Your test would involve attempting to figure out how to do this: are there instructions that explain how to remove another user and change the password, and are they easy to find? This might again reveal that more work is needed to make it clear to the user how they can regain control of the device or account.

Stress testing

To make your product more inclusive and compassionate, consider adding stress testing. This concept comes from Design for Real Life by Eric Meyer and Sara Wachter-Boettcher. The authors pointed out that personas typically center people who are having a good day—but real users are often anxious, stressed out, having a bad day, or even experiencing tragedy. These are called “stress cases,” and testing your products for users in stress-case situations can help you identify places where your design lacks compassion. Design for Real Life has more details about what it looks like to incorporate stress cases into your design as well as many other great tactics for compassionate design.