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

The UX on this small child is terrible

mcsweeneys.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 366 posts

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#51

Post by spzb »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #45
cptnapalm wrote: post #41

In the context of the larger game of Real Life, the NPCs get really mad if you lose one of the children. That's not fun at all.

I remember being a parent helper at a school trip. Now at my paid employment, 99% successful completion rate would be bonus time, but coming back with only 99% of the children who started the trip was considered a failure - clearly the education system has something to learn from modern management practise !

It’s even worse if you come back with 99% having set off with fewer than 100 individual units in the first place.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#52

Post by samwillis »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #21

The antivirus isn't great, either. This is a critical issue, because the networking process inevitably results in numerous breaches which frequently affect other stakeholder systems. Those networking operations critical to a successful eventual deployment of the small child, but the number of bugs experienced is simply inconceivable to users accustomed to good security hygiene.

The trouble we find is our v2 model, which we had hoped could have made improvements over v1, frequents the same unsavoury places that v1 did initially and continues to be compromised by the same vulnerabilities. It seems later versions are destined to make the same mistakes again. The only comfort though is that you have become accustomed to how to address the bug reports when they are filed.

Fortunately our V2 has also reached the point where we have been able to retire our bug reporting and pager setup as it now has its own implementation of this functionality. Although sometimes the reports are less than ideal, such as this evening what it filed a bug report, very loudly, 30 Min after going to bed that it was wearing the wrong pyjamas and the correct ones being it’s Toy Story pyjamas, which were in the wash…

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#53

Post by chrisfinazzo »

coldcode wrote: post #3

This small child has a better UX than many things I have been forced to implement. At least as it iterates, improvements occur that make the UX better and provide a more pleasant experience.

Humans get upgrades for free. With Dogs, you apply the patches yourself.*

Cats? Fuck that, those assholes want or don't need you.

* Results not guaranteed, past performance is no indication of future results. Please read the instruction manual for all possible upgrade scenarios.**

** You believed that shit? Actually, we lied, there are no instructions and everyone is just improvising all the time!

(Evil laughter)

I'll just be over here in a corner trying not to cry...

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#54

Post by dylan604 »

plaidfuji wrote: post #2

How do I get new features added to the roadmap? I’ve been asking for an “eat vegetables” interface without the “offer dessert in exchange” workaround for over a year, no response, yet in the same time frame I’ve seen things like “climb top-heavy bookshelf” and “unfurl entire toilet paper roll” deployed… who is asking for these features??

>who is asking for these features??

The project managers have had a look at some of the competing products, and felt that matching features would be more competitive vs fixing existing bugs.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#55

Post by gumby »

dvaun wrote: post #36
plaidfuji wrote: post #2

How do I get new features added to the roadmap? I’ve been asking for an “eat vegetables” interface without the “offer dessert in exchange” workaround for over a year, no response, yet in the same time frame I’ve seen things like “climb top-heavy bookshelf” and “unfurl entire toilet paper roll” deployed… who is asking for these features??

We put everything on a plate and offer it to the child(ren). Then, if they become hungry later on, they can return to said plate and continue eating. Dessert is considered "equal", so we place it on their plate. However, that also means that they can't raid the pantry for snacks afterward. It seems to be working. Our oldest ate celery and peanut butter the other day, which is pretty unexpected to us.

In the US most peanut butters include added sugar so your kid may have hacked your system.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#57

Post by mdavis6890 »

mattlondon wrote: post #44
cpursley wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it's also the preparation method. Steamed veggies are of course not appealing vs ones flash fried in a little oil/butter plus salt.

Generally speaking, added salt is something you need to avoid with young kids. Likewise for saturated fats. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/baby/weaning-and-feeding/foods...

Regarding salt, From the link, “babies” is different than kids. I doubt salt is going to hurt anyone older except in specific cases like heart disease or something.

I don’t buy the saturated fats thing either, except to the extent that they are a source of calories. If you have links to some studies that indicate negative outcomes vs the same caloric intake from other sources I am willing to read them.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#58

Post by gumby »

cpursley wrote: post #30
mensetmanusman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sugar/bread is easier. We solve this by having a tiered eating system that starts with some salad or veggies, if they don’t eat, they clearly aren’t deathly hungry; dessert is available at the end of the meal if they finish. Note this may require a family eating culture that includes salad et al. With every dinner, which is not the norm in America.

I wonder if it's also the preparation method. Steamed veggies are of course not appealing vs ones flash fried in a little oil/butter plus salt.

Steamed is how I like them the best, FWIW.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#59

Post by civilized »

akeck wrote: post #20

Another McSweeney's article I love: "MEET OLIVIA! THE COVID-19-ERA AMERICAN GIRL DOLL" https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/meet-olivia-the-covid-19... Almost too close to the eventual truth.

Is this... humor...?

Apropos that this has just grabbed HN's top spot https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/briefing/american-childre...

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#60

Post by jokethrowaway »

dvaun wrote: post #36
plaidfuji wrote: post #2

How do I get new features added to the roadmap? I’ve been asking for an “eat vegetables” interface without the “offer dessert in exchange” workaround for over a year, no response, yet in the same time frame I’ve seen things like “climb top-heavy bookshelf” and “unfurl entire toilet paper roll” deployed… who is asking for these features??

We put everything on a plate and offer it to the child(ren). Then, if they become hungry later on, they can return to said plate and continue eating. Dessert is considered "equal", so we place it on their plate. However, that also means that they can't raid the pantry for snacks afterward. It seems to be working. Our oldest ate celery and peanut butter the other day, which is pretty unexpected to us.

Talking by experience, my kids would just eat dessert and cry later that they want more dessert.

I went in the opposite direction. I put a small portion of meat on the dish. When it's over, I put some vegetables; rinse and repeat until the portion of food is assimilated.

It seems like giving small goals is helping with going through the entire dinner and not having a choice minimises building up dislike for a specific food.

I think the reasoning for the second phenomenon is something like:

1. I can eat potatoes or chicken. 2. I like potatoes. 3. I'll eat potatoes. 4. Remember that dislikeChicken++ 4. Go back to 1 until I'm full

Post reply on HN