Big tech products are mostly useless • Hacker News Board

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#101

Post by acdha » Mon, May 21, 2018, 3:44 PM UTC

arca_vorago wrote: post #44

icebraining wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, this article seems as empty and uninteresting as the products it's criticizing. The Guardian should ask idlewords to write one for them instead.

I'm not surprised since the day I got into an argument with the guardians senior tech editor and he tried to argue Foss didn't matter and Linux was a fanboy fad... The senior editor...

If you're a software developer that's certainly a valid gripe but what if you're part of the 99.999% of people who use computers but don't run servers? Linux doesn't run your desktop or iOS devices and if Google swapped the kernel on Android the users wouldn't notice.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#102

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, May 21, 2018, 3:49 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #97

loblollyboy wrote: post #29

Of course, like raking leaves in your lawn, you’re going to run into a kind of diminishing returns situation. So I agree, albeit with an obvious point, My only qualm (beyond the banality of the thesis) is that this dude is forgetting about some other cool advances, such as the sharing economy (Uber/Lyft and airbnb) which kind of changed the world a little, messenger apps (which made day to day life a little more conv…

> this dude is forgetting about some other cool advances, such as the sharing economy (Uber/Lyft and airbnb) which kind of changed the world a little Beyond the “sharing” misnomer, those were proven concepts with existing industries. So far what's been proved is that if you're willing to pour billions of dollars into a company you can produce a better app than the incumbents, and that you can see short-term gains if…

> > if you showed google maps to someone from 2000, they would think it is magic.

> By 2000 the most likely reaction would have been “oh, it's like MapQuest but faster”.

Depends on context. Sure, maybe if you showed it to them on desktop with basic operations (e.g., turned off traffic display, etc.)

Show using it on mobile for navigation with “Ok, Google, navigate to...” with turn-by-turn navigation and real-time, traffic-based route adjustment with voice promoted and confirmation, and it's at least as far beyond 2000s MapQuest as that version of MapQuest is above a dead-tree book of maps.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#103

Post by arojn » Mon, May 21, 2018, 3:53 PM UTC

Zak wrote: post #47

Now, when was the last time you came to book a haircut or restaurant table and concluded that the task was so onerous that you would ideally delegate it to a machine? And even if you can easily think of a scenario, would there not be something ethically questionable about doing so, if the person at the other end had no idea who or what they were talking to? I hate talking on the phone. If I can't fill out a web form…

You have been able to book, as well as pay for, essentially any restaurant in China via WeChat for years. In Sweden most new services like authentication, payments or digital mail are by local companies. The world is increasingly routing around US tech companies to solve these problems.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#104

Post by Balgair » Mon, May 21, 2018, 3:54 PM UTC

Zak wrote: post #47

Now, when was the last time you came to book a haircut or restaurant table and concluded that the task was so onerous that you would ideally delegate it to a machine? And even if you can easily think of a scenario, would there not be something ethically questionable about doing so, if the person at the other end had no idea who or what they were talking to? I hate talking on the phone. If I can't fill out a web form…

Hmm, different strokes - different folks. I actually like to talk to people on the phone. Maybe I need to get out more, but when you can get to a real human, the issues at hand tend to get easier to deal with. Phone trees are a nightmare for me, and I just spam 0 until I get someone (typically works alright, but not always).

The trick, I have found, is to treat the other person on the line, as well, a real person. When they say their name, say it back to them, ask them how their day is, chat for a second about how it's their Wednesday (halfway there!), what the weather like where they are (Broncos are going to have a tough game, eh?), etc. Even just 30 seconds of chatter will get you great service. So many people treat them as 'the help', so when you come in and treat them as an equal human, their day just got a little better, and they'll treat you better too, because you treated them well first.

And I mean you really get better service. That direct line to their manager's manager? You have that now, just because you were nice. That bouquet of flowers for your mom/wife? It just got a little larger, because you asked them how their day is going. That bill you are having trouble paying? It's 15% off, because you complained about the snow too. Yeah, it's not a lot. Yeah, it happens maybe 1/10 times. But it is worth 30 seconds.

Besides, you got to make an actual human's day better. No one is too busy for that, for good manners and a smile, even if it's over the phone.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#105

Post by pavel_lishin » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:01 PM UTC

ribchinski wrote: post #13

Well... I don't particularly agree with everything this guy is saying, but he is right about the internet of things. In my experience, it is quite useless, and it is a danger to privacy. One of the my friends constantly uses Amazon Alexa and Siri for even the most basic questions like, "What is x + y?" which could be easily done faster on a desk calculator. Either I am a person who likes to make things more inconveni…

> "What is x + y?" which could be easily done faster on a desk calculator.

Yes, assuming you're already sitting at your desk, with your desk calculator in hand.

Also, this might be a generational gap issue here, but desk calculator? Not smartphone? (And if I'm at my desk, my goto is usually "ipythonx+y" anyway.)

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#106

Post by Zak » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:06 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #104

Zak wrote: post #47

Now, when was the last time you came to book a haircut or restaurant table and concluded that the task was so onerous that you would ideally delegate it to a machine? And even if you can easily think of a scenario, would there not be something ethically questionable about doing so, if the person at the other end had no idea who or what they were talking to? I hate talking on the phone. If I can't fill out a web form…

Hmm, different strokes - different folks. I actually like to talk to people on the phone. Maybe I need to get out more, but when you can get to a real human, the issues at hand tend to get easier to deal with. Phone trees are a nightmare for me, and I just spam 0 until I get someone (typically works alright, but not always). The trick, I have found, is to treat the other person on the line, as well, a real person. Wh…

I hate IVRs and phone trees too. I probably want the interaction to be a self-service website, depending on the context (making a restaurant reservation, delivery order, etc... are absolutely good fits for this).

For actually resolving a customer service issue, sure I'd rather talk to a human. I do try to be nice to them, and it does, indeed often result in better service.

For getting an update on what's going on with the request I made three months ago, I want a website, or push notifications by email.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#107

Post by Zak » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:09 PM UTC

CosmicSteve wrote: post #100

Zak wrote: post #47

Now, when was the last time you came to book a haircut or restaurant table and concluded that the task was so onerous that you would ideally delegate it to a machine? And even if you can easily think of a scenario, would there not be something ethically questionable about doing so, if the person at the other end had no idea who or what they were talking to? I hate talking on the phone. If I can't fill out a web form…

No worries, soon enough we'll be rid of the horror that is "human interaction". I'm sure that this will have 0 widspread social implications.

Calling on the phone to reserve a table is not a meaningful or valuable human interaction to me. I doubt it is for the person whose job it is to take that call.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#108

Post by mcphage » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

amarkov wrote: post #78

mcphage wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will be solved by tech making remote work viable and thus reducing demand in cities Remote work is viable, and yet the major tech companies are focused on hiring developers in a small number of overcrowded cities (or moving developers that it hires into those cities). I expect no solution to housing or remote work from them.

Isn't that exactly why we should expect a solution from them? Google knows first-hand why some leaders are opposed to remote work, and stands to make a lot of money if they can overcome it.

They haven’t shown any interest in doing so; if they are going to, I’d first expect some indications from them that they see it as a problem.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#109

Post by devonkim » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:37 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #104

Zak wrote: post #47

Now, when was the last time you came to book a haircut or restaurant table and concluded that the task was so onerous that you would ideally delegate it to a machine? And even if you can easily think of a scenario, would there not be something ethically questionable about doing so, if the person at the other end had no idea who or what they were talking to? I hate talking on the phone. If I can't fill out a web form…

Hmm, different strokes - different folks. I actually like to talk to people on the phone. Maybe I need to get out more, but when you can get to a real human, the issues at hand tend to get easier to deal with. Phone trees are a nightmare for me, and I just spam 0 until I get someone (typically works alright, but not always). The trick, I have found, is to treat the other person on the line, as well, a real person. Wh…

The reasons I would like refer a human or automaton depends upon the kind of transaction I need. If it’s something I think is done pretty often I’ll look for a web form with a workflow that someone has invested some time into to make sure the business process works. Additionally, 90% of the time I call a human to do this I can clearly tell that they’re filling out yet another form or even the same one I just had problems with - this is ultimately a UX and business process failure that results in a call center call. I typically wind up playing “let me spell my address and e-mail to someone using variations of military phonetic semaphores” when I can just type it in myself. The number of errors I’ve had over repeating entries over the phone that have resulted in rather serious repercussions are too numerous that I’d rather just type forms in myself if possible.

Where I want a person is when I want to bypass processes completely or I have a big exception that warrants a human. So if I’m calling your call center, you may as well send me up to tier 3 or higher because I’m going to be a pain.

And given I did support for a couple years myself, sure I’ll try to make their day a bit better where I can and try to have all my info ready and to be as calm as possible. Because I know it can take a while, so I usually have an hour or two set aside for these calls and can just wait and not have to hurry anyone.

Re: Big tech products are mostly useless

#110

Post by squarefoot » Mon, May 21, 2018, 4:39 PM UTC

To me many products are just the result of management asking engineers to apply the company IP to make something that can be sold. The market is saturated in every niche with a huge load of products compared to the number of potential buyers, so they have to act creatively in the hope one day they make a killer gimmick. Example: if IoT and AI are the new words, then everything must be connected and/or exhibit human-like intelligence, at the risk of developing junk product with no actual usefulness, like shoes asking politely the user if they can twit in real time how much his feet stink after a long walk. But again that is rather the result of management looking for money in every possible way than brilliant minds attempting to solve vital problems.