Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The pros and cons of placebo buttons

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#21

Post by GuB-42 »

carbocation wrote: post #2

I feel like there is a bit of ethical hysteresis here. If you have buttons that are designed to be placebo from the start, I find that unethical. If you have buttons that work, but have to be disabled due to a change in plans, that strikes me as less problematic (but they should still eventually be removed). So, how you get there matters.

How you get there matters for the budget. But ethically it is the same. In any case, you are consciously lying to people for their own good.

Is lying to people for their own good ethical? You decide, I don't think there is a correct answer.

In fact the second case (not removing the buttons) can be seen as the least ethical of the two. In the first case, it is an assumed choice, you did it because you think it is for the best.

In the second case, you let money guide your ethical choices. That's essentially Black Hat's answer to the trolley problem (https://xkcd.com/1455/)

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#22

Post by skaomatic »

This reminds me of an elevator's "Door Close" button. Manufacturers still include them for the peace of mind of passengers, despite computerized systems and many area laws (in the US, the ADA has language regarding door-open timespan for wheelchair access).

EDIT: Thanks to a_c_s for pointing out that the button can work when the elevator is in emergency/service mode. More fun information on elevators, crosswalk and other buttons can be found here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/us/placebo-buttons-elevat...

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#23

Post by yholio »

Seems there is an important opportunity here to apply machine learning to video feeds of incoming traffic and people flow, and shape the phases to minimize wait time for all citizens, equally. The current systems require expensive induction loops and only care about cars and button pushers, this being how we got here.

If people learn the system acknowledges their needs and tries it best to let them cross safely, it might lead to much better long term compliance then some fake buttons which are bound to be exposed as fake. The whole idea of giving higher priority to cars is an insult to taxpayers walking their neighborhoods.

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#24

Post by s1mon »

Balero wrote: post #20
jkingsbery wrote: post #10

I work in New York, but I go to Seattle periodically because that's where my company's headquarters is. How people treat the buttons is wildly different between those two cities. I hardly ever see anyone press the cross button in NY, since the convention is to wait for there to be no cars and then cross (and not bother with the button). In Seattle, I've seen people wait patiently at a cross walk even though there's n…

I believe jaywalking is illegal, and enforced in Seattle. When I'm in the UK I will normally not press the pedestrian button (unless its the type of pedestrian only crossing which only activate with the button, not on traffic lights on a junction) . But when I'm in the US, or a different country with jaywalking laws, I will stick to the rules much more rigidly. I also really enjoy the first time crossing a road when…

Jaywalking is illegal pretty much everywhere in the US, but enforcement is very selective and regional.

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#25

Post by markwillis82 »

weavie wrote: post #18

For my daughter quite often the highlight of our walk to the shops is that she gets to push the button at the traffic lights. Whether they do anything or not, she just loves pushing buttons.

My 3 little ones have to take turns pressing the button, otherwise it gets messy... by the time they have all pressed the button it's time to cross

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#26

Post by majewsky »

skaomatic wrote: post #22

This reminds me of an elevator's "Door Close" button. Manufacturers still include them for the peace of mind of passengers, despite computerized systems and many area laws (in the US, the ADA has language regarding door-open timespan for wheelchair access). EDIT: Thanks to a_c_s for pointing out that the button can work when the elevator is in emergency/service mode. More fun information on elevators, crosswalk and o…

In my office (in Germany), when the elevator door opens and I hold the "close door" button, it immediately starts closing as soon as it's finished opening. So at least that one is definitely not a placebo.

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#27

Post by shereadsthenews »

yholio wrote: post #23

Seems there is an important opportunity here to apply machine learning to video feeds of incoming traffic and people flow, and shape the phases to minimize wait time for all citizens, equally. The current systems require expensive induction loops and only care about cars and button pushers, this being how we got here. If people learn the system acknowledges their needs and tries it best to let them cross safely, it m…

It would be better to just build smaller intersections that do not need millions of dollars worth of signals and cameras and ML inference rigs.

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#28

Post by Retra »

GuB-42 wrote: post #21
carbocation wrote: post #2

I feel like there is a bit of ethical hysteresis here. If you have buttons that are designed to be placebo from the start, I find that unethical. If you have buttons that work, but have to be disabled due to a change in plans, that strikes me as less problematic (but they should still eventually be removed). So, how you get there matters.

How you get there matters for the budget. But ethically it is the same. In any case, you are consciously lying to people for their own good. Is lying to people for their own good ethical? You decide, I don't think there is a correct answer. In fact the second case (not removing the buttons) can be seen as the least ethical of the two. In the first case, it is an assumed choice, you did it because you think it is for…

It's not really about lying, IMO. (In any case, lying isn't even unethical. -- deceit is.) It's pretty much ok to deceive people if they indirectly agree to it and you stay within bounds of what they agreed to. It is not unreasonable to expect people will be ok with deception conducted to engage in data collection and scientific study, so long as the consequences are negligible, as they are here.

The only ethical problem here is caused if you do not use the collected data, or do not stop the study after a sufficient amount of data is collected.

Re: The pros and cons of placebo buttons

#30

Post by notatcomputer68 »

Konnstann wrote: post #17

I'm fairly certain most, if not all, the lights in my area are automatic, however pressing the button rapidly causes the "wait" message to repeat as fast as you press it, which is a good way to pass the time while waiting. More on topic, I wonder if people who jaywalk don't press buttons, or people who press buttons don't jaywalk? Seems like people who are already not going to jaywalk are more predisposed to button p…

I'll press if I think I can't jaywalk in a reasonable timeframe. If I can then no sense holding up traffic.
Post reply on HN