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

121–130 of 366 posts

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#121

Post by chrisfinazzo »

technothrasher wrote: post #70
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.

"At least as it iterates, improvements occur that make the UX better and provide a more pleasant experience." Certainly more interesting features get activated. But at least with my model, the error reporting got a lot more complicated and the input acceptance rate dropped considerably around the time the product turned 15 years old.

I believe this technique is called fuzzing - Adversarial QA testing to make sure the prior sysadmins weren't total morons and left the system in an unusable state before deploying it to production.

As you say, the reporting is inscrutable, so I'd guess there are still a few bugs to be worked out.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#122

Post by nefitty »

zppln wrote: post #101

As an owner of a fairly new one of these, I sometimes dream of someone coming up with an accessory that converts the audio notifications into light notifications. A small LED would do. I realize different colors for different desires are too much to ask (unless the colors would be picked at random I guess), but I would be more than happy if it just showed intensity of desire via intensity of light.

There are some logging modules that might help debug error messages: https://chatterbaby.org/pages/

It doesn't suppress the audio notifications.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#124

Post by divbzero »

It’s not just UX. The engineering architecture is terrible too. No separation of concerns, no built-in logging, no test environment before running in production, and no access to the source code either. It’s the worst you can imagine of a legacy system and to top it all off I’m pretty sure the original developers threw in random number generators into the logic just for kicks.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#125

Post by thathndude »

nefitty wrote: post #122
zppln wrote: post #101

As an owner of a fairly new one of these, I sometimes dream of someone coming up with an accessory that converts the audio notifications into light notifications. A small LED would do. I realize different colors for different desires are too much to ask (unless the colors would be picked at random I guess), but I would be more than happy if it just showed intensity of desire via intensity of light.

There are some logging modules that might help debug error messages: https://chatterbaby.org/pages/ It doesn't suppress the audio notifications.

Am I the only one who finds this tool a little scary?

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#126

Post by drunner »

hathawsh wrote: post #97
munificent wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shout-out to Adams peanut butter which is delicious and has zero sugar.

Some Adams trivia: - It's owned by Smucker's. I normally dislike anything from Smucker's, but Adams is a nice exception. - If you get the giant jar from Costco, the oil separation is a significant issue. There's a simple solution: dump it all into a big mixing bowl (with the help of a silicone spatula), mix it, and pour it back into the jar. I did it last time I bought it and it was worth the 10 minutes I spent. - On…

The other hack for jars of any size is to store them upside down until you open them for the first time. Then when you open the jar, you get to stir the PB and the oil naturally comes up from the bottom instead of delicately trying to force the oil down without spilling it over the sides.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#127

Post by jimmygrapes »

jokethrowaway wrote: post #60
dvaun wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 specifi…

This is honestly the most original take I've ever seen on handling picky kids, and despite it being sort of in jest I can't help but think there's some potential validity. Kids tend to be pretty easy to manipulate when it comes to food (e.g. "broccoli is tiny trees!"), as long as you can find the fulcrum point from which to pivot the presentation. I hadn't considered the choice/reinforcement aspect of this before, and will keep it in mind as a harmless test concept!

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#128

Post by schwartzworld »

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??

A lot of times if your unit won't accept vegetables, there may be less space in it than you think. Data moves into the trash slowly, and if there isn't enough storage, it will reject the veggies. Give it an hour and try again.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#129

Post by InitialLastName »

oh_sigh wrote: post #5
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #4

The things children are born not knowing is crazy. The pre-programming is limited ! You have to teach them how to blow their nose. "Don't eat your boogers." Holds finger out to me. I wipe it off. "Don't pick your nose, blow it instead. No, don't pick my nose either."

Is there any reason beyond social standards that you shouldn't you eat your boogers, or pick your nose? And of course children wouldn't be pre-programmed for social standards, because you don't know what region they are going to be provisioned in.

I have a distant memory of frequent enough nosebleeds during the dry seasons that the school nurse was worried about me.

Re: The UX on this small child is terrible

#130

Post by InitialLastName »

bell-cot wrote: post #11
oh_sigh wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any reason beyond social standards that you shouldn't you eat your boogers, or pick your nose? And of course children wouldn't be pre-programmed for social standards, because you don't know what region they are going to be provisioned in.

If (say) you're starving to death in Donner Pass, then go ahead. Similar for drinking your urine - if at sea in lifeboat and dying for lack of non-salty water. Otherwise, violations of "eww, ick" social standards tend to be punished harshly. It seemed really weird for a few years, when conspicuously talking to yourself went from being a "this person has a serious mental illness" indicator, to being a "this person has…

I really wish we had stayed in the "this person is an inconsiderate **" intermediate phase.
Post reply on HN