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

Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 130 posts

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#101

Post by mathgeek »

epcoa wrote: post #83
Morromist wrote: post #73

Scout sounds like an excitable little dog that runs headlong into trees when trying to catch a frisbee. Given Microsoft's long history of failure with personal assistants I'm looking forward to this one! Clippy, Cortana, Copilot! Wasn't an animated dog called rover one of these way back? The best of all was unquestionably Ms. Dewey for Microsoft Windows Live Search who is almost forgotten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob You can go straight to hell for making me feel old.

As a kid I absolutely loved these interfaces.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#102

Post by not_a_bot_4sho »

aaaronic wrote: post #77
Morromist wrote: post #73

Scout sounds like an excitable little dog that runs headlong into trees when trying to catch a frisbee. Given Microsoft's long history of failure with personal assistants I'm looking forward to this one! Clippy, Cortana, Copilot! Wasn't an animated dog called rover one of these way back? The best of all was unquestionably Ms. Dewey for Microsoft Windows Live Search who is almost forgotten.

I thought his name was Watson (the dog assistant). Edit: I was wrong. But there is "Power Pup" and apparently Will Shakespeare

Power pup was the superdog. Rocky was the normal dog.

(I was way too into the building apps with the assistant framework as a kid...)

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#103

Post by ajcp »

TZubiri wrote: post #86

Feedback to microsoft: I'm confused and dissapointed that this isn't called Copilot, the users want more things to be called copilot even if they aren't related to each other, consider renaming Scout to Copilot, or at least Scout Copilot, or even better Copilot* (*Copilot Scout)

It's technically called Autopilot* Scout if you can believe it...

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#104

Post by antiframe »

grassfedgeek wrote: post #92
antiframe wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone who makes products want users of our product to keep coming back as though they are addicted, but not actually addicted. Can you explain the distinction? I am not seeing it. If I keep refreshing a product page to get another dopamine hit, am I addicted or not addicted but appearing so to your metrics?

Are you addicted to your job? You keep going back every single work day. Does that mean you are addicted? Just because you keep repeating an action doesn't mean you're addicted. It just means it is solving a problem for you (such as providing you with a salary to buy food and pay rent) and does it well.

I am not addicted to my job but my employer would like me to be.

I think apps are a different beast. They (generally, with few exceptions) want their users to be addicted. An addicted user is more likely to come back than one that gets a need met. Once that need is fulfilled, they leave.

If companies actually wanted to fill people's needs they wouldn't use dark patterns like having to call to cancel, spamming them without their consent, switching opt-out choices back with updates, etc. Because they use these dirty tricks, it's hard to believe they have the users best interest in mind. They don't. They just want the line to go up.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#105

Post by joe_the_user »

grassfedgeek wrote: post #76

"Addiction" is a bad word. It implies the user is not in control of themselves. Anyone who makes products want users of our product to keep coming back as though they are addicted, but not actually addicted.

Indeed,

There's a race and tug-of-war to frame how interaction with apps works. The addiction word has a strong "think of the children" energy and I would expand any company to want to have their app tagged with the term.

Of course, what exactly "addicted" means in the context of interacting with a program really pretty fuzzy but yeah, "users not in control of themselves" is perhaps the biggest implication (and not necessarily false, mind you). Of course, this is a matter of both degree and social context.

If only we had a social dialog about the real meaning of things labeled addictive, perhaps their terrible impact could be mitigated. But hey, I guess we get policing and moral panics instead.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#106

Post by joe_the_user »

antiframe wrote: post #79
grassfedgeek wrote: post #76

"Addiction" is a bad word. It implies the user is not in control of themselves. Anyone who makes products want users of our product to keep coming back as though they are addicted, but not actually addicted.

> Anyone who makes products want users of our product to keep coming back as though they are addicted, but not actually addicted. Can you explain the distinction? I am not seeing it. If I keep refreshing a product page to get another dopamine hit, am I addicted or not addicted but appearing so to your metrics?

I think the point the gp is making that companies want their users addicted but never should say "addicted" since it has undesirable implications.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#107

Post by twelvedogs »

grassfedgeek wrote: post #76

"Addiction" is a bad word. It implies the user is not in control of themselves. Anyone who makes products want users of our product to keep coming back as though they are addicted, but not actually addicted.

why do you think microsoft is that concerned with their user's wellbeing?

there are other industries who's entire business revovles around selling to addicts, why would MS of all companies suddenly balk at that line?

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#108

Post by kristopolous »

epcoa wrote: post #83
Morromist wrote: post #73

Scout sounds like an excitable little dog that runs headlong into trees when trying to catch a frisbee. Given Microsoft's long history of failure with personal assistants I'm looking forward to this one! Clippy, Cortana, Copilot! Wasn't an animated dog called rover one of these way back? The best of all was unquestionably Ms. Dewey for Microsoft Windows Live Search who is almost forgotten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob You can go straight to hell for making me feel old.

guess who is reusing that name?

https://bob.ibm.com/

I saw IBMers wearing shirts with it at the moscone center this week at the snowflake event.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#109

Post by antiframe »

grassfedgeek wrote: post #97
sfRattan wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've met plenty of people who want to make products that solve problems , even if the product's user only has those problems once in a while. Reaching for a well-liked, well-matched tool whenever a problem arises isn't addicted or quasi-addicted or "as though" addicted behavior. Once you're thinking about how to keep a user coming back , you're in the mutually adversarial design space, whatever language is used to mo…

You can't be a good designer if you aren't thinking about how to get your users to love your product so much that they keep coming back. There are good and bad ways to keep users coming back. The good way is to simply make the product very useful. The bad way is to make the user psychologically dependent on your product in some way.

Yet almost everyone uses dark patterns, which imply they don't think their product is good enough for users to return on their own volition. In fact, I can't think of a single for-profit company that doesn't use at least one dark pattern.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#110

Post by [deleted] »

sumeno wrote: post #82
yieldcrv wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Microsoft's CEO seems unaware of what's going on at his own company. damn, he quickly disavowed the statement and got panned anyway would falling on the sword worked better??

He's lying or incompetent, your choice

[deleted]
Post reply on HN