The User Always Loses • Hacker News Board

Re: The User Always Loses

#31

Post by njarboe » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 2:59 PM UTC

true_religion wrote: post #25

katsume3 wrote: post #23

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users. [0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Is it an advertisement when it’s the same property that you are in? That’s like HBO advertising the next episode of a show you are watching.

Yes. And I find it annoying when HBO plays ads for their shows before starting what I have selected to watch. They started doing this a year or two ago.

Re: The User Always Loses

#32

Post by jasode » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:00 PM UTC

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

>The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns [...]

VCs are not the root cause. You're not looking hard enough for counterexamples.

Examples of software companies that didn't take VC money that many consider to be "user hostile" are:

- Intuit -- see 1-star reviews on Amazon of annual Quicken releases and forced upgrades of buggy software that nobody wants

- Autodesk -- expensive licensing and stagnant features and bug fixes in Revit, 3ds Max, etc

- Microsoft -- list of various user complaints over decades are well known [pedantic alert: MS took a little bit of VC money from David F. Marquardt but they didn't need it because they were already profitable with cash in the bank; they just wanted DFM as an advisor for their upcoming IPO]

The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money. E.g. Look at COVID causing some colleges/universities cancelling in-person classes and refuse to refund tuition fees claiming that "video instruction" is same quality of education. The money came from students and not VCs. You can't blame VCs for that.

>VC is ripe for disruption.

The issue is the company founders, not the VCs.

Re: The User Always Loses

#33

Post by codethief » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:00 PM UTC

katsume3 wrote: post #23

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users. [0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Interesting, I'm not getting that modal. Have you recently read some other articles by The Nation?

Re: The User Always Loses

#34

Post by harha » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:00 PM UTC

nkingsy wrote: post #27

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

Disruption requires inefficiencies/skirtable regulations in the existing system. In this case the system is capitalism itself. As long as software development and user acquisition requires capital, software doesn’t seem all that different from other capital intensive activities. IMO this will change when 1. Regulations and/or cultural norms inhibit user-hostile behavior. Or 2. capitalism itself changes

Regulation could go a long way, e.g. tax incentives for open source development or using open standard/platforms. Imagine giving developers or companies lower tax rates on profits from open source products, e.g. for resulting donation income.

That way they could operate cheaper and could pass the savings in tax on to users or investors. For clients this would be nice too, they could reduce the risk of being locked in when choosing a provider and shouldn’t care as long as it’s not their core business.

The challenge would be preventing misuse and how to get countries to give away tax income that other countries might use.

Re: The User Always Loses

#35

Post by minerjoe » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:01 PM UTC

katsume3 wrote: post #23

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users. [0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Curious to why you had to turn on JS to view the article. The article is contained, in its entirety, in the initial page load. I use a modified version of links that doesn't even have javascript to turn on and the page popped open, as most do, without distractions.

Re: The User Always Loses

#36

Post by troelsSteegin » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:01 PM UTC

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

I interpret what you mean as "VC model" as investment bets that are essentially high risk / high return. A high return play would be one that envisions dominance in a $1B plus market, and high risk play is say a 5% chance that you see your money back. How does "high return" mess up UX? If I understand the "Lurking" review, it would be by focusing on skeevey attention/reward patterns to habituate interaction in online communities. That seems like a narrow case for your broad claim. I also don't understand the "scarcity and under-production" bits.

That said, disrupting the "VC model" seems like an interesting question. The implication for me would be many more bets that are lower risk / more marginal returns. An IPO or buying stock would fit that profile, but that's small amount of opportunities overall and there's nothing disruptive about that. For me, an example of something different might be community-focused investing. Pick a region or town as a locus of investing, and invest in a number of existing business and infrastructure all across the broad, with the idea of moving that local instance of an economic system from a static phase to a growth phase. That has nothing to do with tech, per se. Maybe that's the disruption ...

Re: The User Always Loses

#37

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:04 PM UTC

jiofih wrote: post #2

> blogging take off as a shared response to the US invasion of Iraq Blogging took off because half the worlds population started having access to the internet in the early 2000s. That seems incredibly myopic and US centric.

[deleted]

Re: The User Always Loses

#38

Post by EarthIsHome » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:08 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #32

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

>The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns [...] VCs are not the root cause. You're not looking hard enough for counterexamples . Examples of software companies that didn't take VC money that many consider to be "user hostile" are: - Intuit -- see 1-star reviews on Amazon of annual Quicken releases and forced upgrades of bugg…

> The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money.

Let's take this further and ask What is the driving factor for humans to want to accumulate more money?

I think the human founders are responding to external pressures that incentivize the accumulation of wealth.

Re: The User Always Loses

#39

Post by aaronax » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:11 PM UTC

true_religion wrote: post #25

katsume3 wrote: post #23

I find it ironic that this article talks about the user losing out to aggressive (and intrusive) advertising on the web, but presents me with an un-closeable modal window[0] asking me to subscribe to their blog. Note: I have JS disabled by default, and had to temporarily enable JS to view the article, but it's still intrusive and annoying for users. [0] https://imgur.com/a/SQSHh0i

Is it an advertisement when it’s the same property that you are in? That’s like HBO advertising the next episode of a show you are watching.

Yes, though it does become a fuzzy line.

I believe it would not be advertising to display the next episode of a series, or even auto play it. But it would be advertising to display a different series or film.

For a fuzzier one, how about a newspaper providing links to their other stories at the bottom of an article that you have read? Typically I gain nothing by ingesting more of a particular publication's writing, so that could be an ad rather than useful functionality. Perhaps not in a special circumstance such as if I am trying to catch up on news local to that publication.

Re: The User Always Loses

#40

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg » Sat, Sep 05, 2020, 3:15 PM UTC

EarthIsHome wrote: post #38

jasode wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns [...] VCs are not the root cause. You're not looking hard enough for counterexamples . Examples of software companies that didn't take VC money that many consider to be "user hostile" are: - Intuit -- see 1-star reviews on Amazon of annual Quicken releases and forced upgrades of bugg…

> The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money. Let's take this further and ask What is the driving factor for humans to want to accumulate more money? I think the human founders are responding to external pressures that incentivize the accumulation of wealth.

R.e. "external" pressures. This explanation does not seem very efficient. There are tangible benefits to wealth accumulation. Wealth can afford its owner many kinds of different pleasures that are less available to the less wealthy. It also protects from many harms. All organisms in existence are avaricious to some extent or another, because the ancestral environment favors this trait.