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

Scientists who make apps addictive

1843magazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#11

Post by netcan »

koliber wrote: post #6
maxxxxx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicely said. This really summarizes how I feel when I use a lot of modern websites. I often feel manipulated. Instead of me driving the interaction the website tries to impose its opinion on what I need or want.

Every UI presents an opinion. In many cases, that opinion is unclear, muddled, or counterintuitive. As developers and designers pay more attention to the UX, that opinion becomes more clear and unilateral. In the end, the decision to like a piece of software or website depends on how well your expectations align with the opinion that the UI expresses. If you feel manipulated, it means that you did not want to do some…

These are soft concepts, so I don't think we can be totally right or wrong about them. That said, I think there's more than opinion here. There's agenda too. When a browser or search engine wants to update your defaults, that's more agenda than opinion.

With a lot of modern software (FB is the big example) has an agenda. A list of stuff labeled KPI on a whiteboard.. stuff FB would like people to do.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#12

Post by jacobush »

logicallee wrote: post #9
netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

Wow, this is probably the most insightful comment I've read in the past 2 years on HN. Thanks. It is also a giant market opportunity. If there were a video site for tutorials (in every field) that just show what you want and not emphasize "user engagement" (time on site) instead of, "hey what's up youtube justin here and today we're going to take a look at how to (click, snip, tie, step, whatever). Intro music. So la…

That could be the path that got General AI started... :-P

don't know if I'm serious or not.

Let that A.I. figure out tutorials based on what people search for.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#13

Post by simion314 »

netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

I just seen this in action, I bought something with paypal and I get an email that my device is now trusted but if this is a shared device or it is stolen I need to go to place X and do Y, Basically instead of getting asked if I want this I was forced into it and I had to use the steps in email to fix it, at least they allowed me to not link my Google account with PayPal by adding a small link on the bottom with "Not now" text

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#14

Post by xtracto »

maxxxxx wrote: post #5
netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

Nicely said. This really summarizes how I feel when I use a lot of modern websites. I often feel manipulated. Instead of me driving the interaction the website tries to impose its opinion on what I need or want.

I justo experienced this with s chess game app (lichess) that suddenly would not let me play by purpose.

A software that don't want you to use it? Very stupid

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#15

Post by chrissoundz »

xtracto wrote: post #14
maxxxxx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicely said. This really summarizes how I feel when I use a lot of modern websites. I often feel manipulated. Instead of me driving the interaction the website tries to impose its opinion on what I need or want.

I justo experienced this with s chess game app (lichess) that suddenly would not let me play by purpose. A software that don't want you to use it? Very stupid

Fellow user of lichess here, what do you mean by it would not let you play?

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#16

Post by fegu »

logicallee wrote: post #9
netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

Wow, this is probably the most insightful comment I've read in the past 2 years on HN. Thanks. It is also a giant market opportunity. If there were a video site for tutorials (in every field) that just show what you want and not emphasize "user engagement" (time on site) instead of, "hey what's up youtube justin here and today we're going to take a look at how to (click, snip, tie, step, whatever). Intro music. So la…

Made me chuckle. Spot on. Also why I only go to YouTube as a last resort.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#17

Post by Uberphallus »

Inu wrote: post #8

I think the general danger with computers is falling into a trap of repetitive behavior. In the age of letters you'd check your letter box maybe once a day. Now everywhere we have systems of immediate responses. It creates these loops of repetition where the constant stream of new data drives the user to be constantly aware of the possibility to respond and consume. What if letters could arrive at your home invisibly…

That's the first thing I do when I get a new phone: set up mail and usual apps, disable notifications for most, notify every 4 hours for mail & others, though I usually leave instant messaging run regularly. Also my phone is most of the time in do not disturb, only calls go through.

At the beginning I kept checking, but eventually the need dies off, at least in my case. Anything actually important will be a call.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#18

Post by sdeepak »

netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

That's a great point. The rate in which human mind evolves clearly is not catching up with software getting more and more intelligent (doing what you want to do with software Vs what software wants you to do). Last 15 years have definitely changed how humanity is evolving, partly because decision makers/ people in control couldn't anticipate what's going to happen and partly because it took time for the general public to understand what is happening. These two phenomena always counterbalanced each other time to time. This is probably the first time in history that they coincided.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#19

Post by maxxxxx »

jerrre wrote: post #7
koliber wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every UI presents an opinion. In many cases, that opinion is unclear, muddled, or counterintuitive. As developers and designers pay more attention to the UX, that opinion becomes more clear and unilateral. In the end, the decision to like a piece of software or website depends on how well your expectations align with the opinion that the UI expresses. If you feel manipulated, it means that you did not want to do some…

I think a big differences is between a) tools for professionals/experts where the assumption is the user knows best what it wants, and will spend time figuring out how to reach it b) the instagram/autotune etc kind of tools that make everyone feel like an expert without doing the work, by providing very nice results for very little effort, but as a user you will very quickly run into the limititions when you form you…

And by becoming b) the designers of the tools can also inject their agenda which is probably often selling more ads or driving up some metric like engagement. The goal of computers used to be to empower people but now it seems just to push people into doing what companies want them to do.

That concerns me about the progress in AI. It won't be used to help us but mainly to manipulate us.

Re: Scientists who make apps addictive

#20

Post by jerrre »

logicallee wrote: post #9
netcan wrote: post #4

The development of online software over the last 10-15 years is a case study in feedback loops. It really has flipped the paradigm. For lotus notes, success is when a user makes the software do what she wants, like sending an email. In the modern equivalent, the software (designer) succeeds, when the user does what the software wants, like sending an email.

Wow, this is probably the most insightful comment I've read in the past 2 years on HN. Thanks. It is also a giant market opportunity. If there were a video site for tutorials (in every field) that just show what you want and not emphasize "user engagement" (time on site) instead of, "hey what's up youtube justin here and today we're going to take a look at how to (click, snip, tie, step, whatever). Intro music. So la…

Maybe a site that uses all existing videos on YT, but points directly to the relevant point?
Post reply on HN