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

The User Always Loses

thenation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: The User Always Loses

#101

Post by heavenlyblue »

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

I don’t think your message contains anything material. It’s all vocal gymnastics.

Re: The User Always Loses

#102

Post by solatic »

benjaminjosephw wrote: post #16

The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns is a feature/bug that determines the course these companies are likely to take. It creates the need to occasionally tade end-user freedoms for opportunities to "capture value". Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem…

> Venture Capital also imports theories of scarcity and under-production that our entire open-source ecosystem have shown don't apply in the same way to the digital world.

What's scarce isn't software, it's time. For certain classes of products (specifically, those with network effects), getting earlier to a larger market can be the difference between a company worth billions and a company that goes bankrupt. What 2005-2015 VC tries to do is to inject funding into companies specifically so that they can go on massive hiring sprees and try to capture the market before any of their competitors.

> The VC model for funding technology...

This is the root of your misconception. VC doesn't fund technology, it funds growth. It's not the same thing. Sometimes it correlates, where technology is what permits previously-impossible growth to happen, but it's not the same thing.

> VC is ripe for disruption.

No, what you're seeing is a classic bubble. The success of early Silicon Valley VC funds like Sequoia and A18Z came from understanding that VC funds growth, not technology. Today you look at the funding landscape and you see thousands of sources for "VC" funding by people who think that any technology will lend itself to massive scale and growth, and most of those efforts fail miserably, particularly the ones where there are no network effects or other barriers to entry and the businesses eventually commoditize. At which point, it's very clear - if you sell a commodity, and you're not yet a Fortune 500-sized enterprise, then from a VC expectations point of view, you failed.

If you want to fund technology - really fund technology - then advocate for better public funding of research. Only state-level governments can afford to put funding into research projects that will have a 20+-year horizon from idea to commercially-ready product. There are well-established pipelines for taking academic research with commercial applications and turning them into profitable companies.

Re: The User Always Loses

#103

Post by bmitc »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #96
jasode wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns [...] VCs are not the root cause. You're not looking hard enough for counterexamples . Examples of software companies that didn't take VC money that many consider to be "user hostile" are: - Intuit -- see 1-star reviews on Amazon of annual Quicken releases and forced upgrades of bugg…

FWIW you can address all of your criticisms by expanding the problem from VCs to non-founder investors generally. All of your examples are publicly-traded companies. > The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money. E.g. Look at COVID causing some colleges/universities cancelling in-person classes and refuse to refund tuition fees cl…

I have seen professors mention that their prep time has multiplied since they are now producing lectures rather than giving them live. They now need to deal with video production, remote homework and test submissions and returns, live lecture production, tech issues, etc.

https://twitter.com/robertghrist/status/1279489089063079938?...

Here’s some more interesting discussion.

https://twitter.com/robertghrist/status/1288218327127666690?...

https://twitter.com/stevenstrogatz/status/129713848913856921...

https://twitter.com/stevenstrogatz/status/130128164056044749...

Although I definitely feel for students, because prices for education are just insane in general. We should not be forcing debt upon our young people. But both professors and students are along for the tough ride.

Re: The User Always Loses

#104

Post by iso1210 »

iamthrowaway wrote: post #82
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a perhaps weird take that I'm not convinced of myself, but it's interesting food for thought. Maybe the big companies pay so well the floor is just that high. Let's say you, a hopeful founder, could get $0.5M/yr at a BigCo. Instead you're going to start a company where you'll earn maybe $0.15M/yr for a decade then either get a payout (10%) or fail (90%). To make them even in expectation after that decade, you…

Well, as someone who just left a 750k USD a year at a FAANG with a clear path to making 2MM+ in 5 years or so, I disagree. I am in my early 30s and have a wife and kids. At some point, your relationship with money changes. I am now more concerned about my own legacy and the example I’m giving my kids than whether my net worth in 10 years will be 2 or 20 million. I’m also more deliberate about how I use my time. So I’…

> I am in my early 30s and have a wife and kids. At some point, your relationship with money changes. I am now more concerned about my own legacy and the example I’m giving my kids than whether my net worth in 10 years will be 2 or 20 million.

Narator: The median wealth of a 30-35 year old American is $30k.

Re: The User Always Loses

#105

Post by ohazi »

thewebcount wrote: post #79
ohazi wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money. At least for software, we know of one solution that works: free (as in speech) software. Still made by humans, but usually without the self-serving greed, and if any of that does turn up, you never lose access to the last-good version and source, in case you or someone else wants to f…

> At least for software, we know of one solution that works: free (as in speech) software. Still made by humans, but usually without the self-serving greed Sorry, but this is laughable. Instead of self-serving greed, you have self-serving "what interests the person writing it." That leaves us with open source software that has horrible user interfaces and is every bit as user-hostile as for-pay software. (For example…

> laughable

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" -- Misattributed

> horrible user interfaces and is every bit as user-hostile as for-pay software

This statement is laughable. A poorly designed UI is not equivalent to a UI filled with dark patterns. I was asserting that free software is a known solution to user-hostile software, not a solution to bad UI.

Do you really think being confused about how to rebase in git is the same as being tricked into creating an online Microsoft account instead of a local account when installing Windows? Or being tricked into buying some TurboTax add-on that you didn't want or need, and can't refund without wasting 2 hours on the phone?

The solution to the git problem is to read the documentation. Nobody is actively trying to prevent you from solving your problem, the designers are just bad at UI design. The solution to Microsoft's problem is to realize that it's intentionally user-hostile, and you have to find a workaround that they don't want you to use, like temporarily disconnecting from the internet. The solution to the TurboTax problem is to just be vigilant and paranoid and exhausted at all times.

The git situation is unfortunate. The Microsoft and TurboTax situations are stupid user-hostile bullshit. They're not even remotely equivalent.

I'm going to stick to my principles and continue working to create the software future that I actually prefer. I won't tell you to "just fork it and fix it yourself" like some other people might -- you're free to take the short term perspective if you prefer. You're free to laugh at me and others if you prefer.

But in the long run, your perspective is wrong. Free software is like a steamroller. It's slow, but it's slow because the people building it observe what's being built around them and tend to take the longer route of building it correctly rather than just cranking out whatever makes investors happy.

In the long run, the git UI will be improved, or an better replacement will turn up. Microsoft's telemetry, on the other hand, will never go away.

Re: The User Always Loses

#106

Post by MultusSalus »

astura wrote: post #14
jiofih wrote: post #2

> blogging take off as a shared response to the US invasion of Iraq Blogging took off because half the worlds population started having access to the internet in the early 2000s. That seems incredibly myopic and US centric.

Not only is myopic and US-centered, it's just plain non-factual, LiveJournal really took off pre-9/11. Around 2000-2001 literally everyone in my friend group were on LJ (except me), and not just passively/occasionally - regular active users and always talking about LJ stuff IRL. Even people who didn't have a computer at home! It seemed like it was just as much a social network as it was a publishing platform. Accordi…

> how many blog posts can the average person write about their feelings on the Iraq War?

A books worth: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/deepdish/ebooks/i-was-wrong/

Re: The User Always Loses

#107

Post by willismichael »

inetknght wrote: post #43
yerabotarry wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The internet of the 90s is still alive if you step outside the walled gardens. Dont you see the bars on the windows and doors?

> Dont you see the bars on the windows and doors? Yup. Captchas are everywhere. Javascript is everywhere. Finding a website that loads without having to enable javascript or go through captcha is a breath of relief. They do exist.

I keep thinking that I would like a search engine that specifically favors minimalist, 90s style personal websites.

Re: The User Always Loses

#108

Post by juped »

ohazi wrote: post #105
thewebcount wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least for software, we know of one solution that works: free (as in speech) software. Still made by humans, but usually without the self-serving greed Sorry, but this is laughable. Instead of self-serving greed, you have self-serving "what interests the person writing it." That leaves us with open source software that has horrible user interfaces and is every bit as user-hostile as for-pay software. (For example…

> laughable "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" -- Misattributed > horrible user interfaces and is every bit as user-hostile as for-pay software This statement is laughable. A poorly designed UI is not equivalent to a UI filled with dark patterns. I was asserting that free software is a known solution to user-hostile software, not a solution to bad UI. Do you really thin…

The Git UI will probably never be "improved" because it makes sense to people who understand how Git works rather than pasting command lines they found online, and the few real warts like status output telling you to use "git pull", which is a mistake in the workflows most people use, are too old and entrenched.

If you look at the discussions on the mailing list, you'll see people care a lot and make thoughtful decisions about the user experience, it just isn't aimed at the people for whom no possible user interface change would be helpful, because they don't know what's going on and don't read documentation.

Re: The User Always Loses

#109

Post by [deleted] »

willismichael wrote: post #107
inetknght wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dont you see the bars on the windows and doors? Yup. Captchas are everywhere. Javascript is everywhere. Finding a website that loads without having to enable javascript or go through captcha is a breath of relief. They do exist.

I keep thinking that I would like a search engine that specifically favors minimalist, 90s style personal websites.

[deleted]

Re: The User Always Loses

#110

Post by bsder »

ohazi wrote: post #46
jasode wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The VC model for funding technology is the root cause of user hostile technology. The pressure of investments that expect high returns [...] VCs are not the root cause. You're not looking hard enough for counterexamples . Examples of software companies that didn't take VC money that many consider to be "user hostile" are: - Intuit -- see 1-star reviews on Amazon of annual Quicken releases and forced upgrades of bugg…

> The real root cause of "user hostility" is that companies are run by humans and humans are self-serving and want to make more money. At least for software, we know of one solution that works: free (as in speech) software. Still made by humans, but usually without the self-serving greed, and if any of that does turn up, you never lose access to the last-good version and source, in case you or someone else wants to f…

> At least for software, we know of one solution that works: free (as in speech) software.

No it doesn't.

We have FAR too many pieces of open source software that are maintained by one person who gets no support.

Good software requires sustained support--generally from corporations.

Even something as venerable as emacs was just one of many until Lucid put a huge amount of effort behind it.

Post reply on HN