Live data from Hacker News

The Doorman's Fallacy in action

rozumem.xyz

181–190 of 326 posts

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#181
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such feature is designed to catch people who might not pay attention. Innocent looking money grab. Some better parking apps simply let you start the meter and then stop when you get back to your car, so you don't have to worry you miss it and get a fine.

If you forget to pay when you get back to your car, are you charged the max? That's how it works with other systems like this that I've used.

Yes it does that. Still, less than a fine would have been.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#182
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But doormen became a thing, so the value was understood. We have now lost that knowledge. I suppose it's like enshittification. It's presented as a progression to a new worse thing when it's more of a Dark Age of 'soft' knowledge.

Labour was cheaper back then. Even valuable jobs can stop making sense if the costs outweigh them. That's the difficulty with automation making other sectors more efficient, wages get driven up while your productivity stays the same.

It still seems to me designing applications or web services is so hard that it's just easier to hire thousands of people to do customer service and having people to come physically to do things. The average corporation's business application or web page is absolutely terrible and a lot of non-technical users simply can not do business with it. Ie it is a hindrance for the businesses core reason of existence. Do the QR code things show up in revenue tracking? Do they do A/B testing? I think I prefer to choose another restaurant if I see that, or not come again.

I think some small pizza shops have had proper simple web pages, probably because it's do-or-die for them and the person contracting the web page is the person also knowing very well how the business is doing. Also phone interactions are very fast and straightforward. It's sad to see them having to struggle with terrible card payment terminals and everybody trying to take a cut (credit card and delivery companies).

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#183

> But when 6 people simultaneously tried to pay their share of the bill, chaos ensued. Hasn't that been a fact of life ? If anything, apps made it barely made easier through splitting either the whole bill equally or offer a bit by bit checking interface. Otherwise on the role of QR codes and online menu, it actually helps a lot for allergies as everyone can check their for each individual item and adjust accordingly…

> > But when 6 people simultaneously tried to pay their share of the bill, chaos ensued.

> Hasn't that been a fact of life ?

I remember having to split bar tabs at the end of the night before phones. No calculators. Drunk people trying to do math is a spectacle to behold. Everyone throwing random cash amounts in the centre of the table, taking their own change, and one person attempting to reconcile the total then asking for more contributions if we were short.

Electronic bill-splitting is superior in just about every way.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#184
This seems like it has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the confusion that has always arisen when 6 people try and split a bill, it has always been like that. As for "secretly" trying to pay for an apple crumble, I have no idea how technology is supposed to help there. The way QR code scans usually work is you scan, order, and pay individually.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#185
When I was in Bangkok a good while back, I was surprised how there’re doormen at shopping mall—humans to handle simple things which in many parts of the world would certainly not involve a person.

A bit later I thought that it makes sense: it improves customer experience and slightly reduces unemployment in local population—a doorman job is better than no job.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#186
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When your grocery store gets a self checkout, do you see your grocery bills go down? What ends up happening is that the grocery store makes more profit, the other stores notice and they too get rid of self checkouts. Your grocery bill remains the same, you are more inconvenienced but all of their profits go up.

Yeah sure. That's the logic that elects Mamdani. Maybe you're confused because instead of going down, prices increased less than they otherwise would have. Economics happens on the margins where the reality is that store A reduces its costs and lowers its prices to compete with Store B. Or are you paying $100 for a jar of peanut butter?

> That's the logic that elects Mamdani

Correct and increasingly popular logic? I agree entirely!

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#187

To clarify, the Doorman Fallacy is about the Doorman doing more than their job actually seems. The Doorman isn't just a greeter, but they are checking that the right people are coming in, they are going to report issues that patrons pass onto them, they check that the UPS guy is actually from UPS, they're the first to notice damage to the property, they call the police if they see a crime happening in the area, and s…

Taking the restaurant ordering app, it’s certainly better than a server. Each individual picks what they want and pays for what they got on their own bill. It removes any chance of communication error between the customer and the kitchen. Appetizers to share easily split across who wanted them. No bill splitting discussions. OP just had to use a bad implementation.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#188
My company recently hired a concierge. At first I thought it was unnecessary and just meant to give someone's friend a job.

But the guy is really good at it. He organises groups of people who show up; he knows everybody, so he can quickly point people to where they should go; and overall he just makes the reception a welcoming place.

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#189
It's weird to see someone present as novel what is like talking about the weather, at least for the average person in the U.S. (not in the Bay Area, in the U.S.).

It's fascinating to me that the large companies never did anything to break out of the experiences of someone in Dubai or SF or Singapore, etc. vs far more "average" places are not similar experiences and therefore product design suffers.

I get that other companies are the ones with the most money, but failing to expand into selling things people actually want (like Apple briefly did) is the most interesting problem to come out of Silicon Valley (no one sells anything people want, besides ads -- they give things away and then sell to companies).

Re: The Doorman's Fallacy in action

#190
post #5

What the article misses is that money is saved for the company by moving the work to the customer / end user. It's the same thing with sending parcels, where I must now sit on my computer at home filling in a complicated online form and printing out my own labels. This takes me like 30 minutes, but saves time and money for the Post Office (not for me!) There's no downside for the company here, especially when they ar…

Don't forget self check out at the grocery store. I don't mind personally (I find ways to make it worth my while..) but it's a version of the same thing. Shifting labor under the guise of convenience. Like all the other versions of this, the savings are absorbed by the company, not passed on to the consumer. It's rare that the opposite happens.

I'm not sure what labour is being shifted onto me that I wasn't already doing here. I already had to bag my groceries and swipe my card. Scanning items can be done in a single motion while bagging, so the overhead is non-existent to me.

Meanwhile, self-checkout removes a bottleneck in that there are now more places to check out, meaning I have to wait less and thus spend less time shopping. So all in all, no more labour done, and yet my time is saved. I call that a win-win.

Post reply on HN