Jurijs’s Reviews > Thinking in Services: Encoding and Expressing Strategy through Design > Status Update

Is this a joke? It's not funny.

Painstaking description of the framework, with the most bizarre choice of notation imaginable.

More confusing notions and notations. Keep it locked.

One can form domain-specific [[pattern language of services]] (AWS, Azure). The consist of low-level patters (storage, compute) to build higher- (identity, CDN) and higher-level services (Spotify, Netflix).

#💭 Not sure that architecture specific patterns of Christopher Alexander - from windows level to region level is the same language. Is there an actual connection between levels?

end of chapter 2. idk, author is introducing incredibly backwards vocab to think about services: artifacts, events, resources, capabilities, shortfalls and shortcomings, X for affordance, Y for performance (which should be named executions). What is happening? Takeaways: define the 'whys' and the 'soul' of service not to loose yourself in overcomplicated service scripts. Always look at the whole AND parts.

How we have definition or services (we divided the world into services and non-services) we will throw away the rest of the world. Off we go.

End of chapter 1.

"But services are still products."

"Outcome is what we pay for and experience is what with pay with"
Disagree that We pay for both, we pay with the resources we have. Otherwise it would be bad business for providers.

Services require agents—people or code — mostly service executors.
The issue is that agents have agency. They can act to maximize their benefits. Doctors and car mechanics recommend unnecessary treatments and maintenance. Search engines recommend the highest bidders.