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

'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 870 posts

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#301

Post by hibikir »

ryandrake wrote: post #163
pqtyw wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. I certainly don't agree with that one. I really don't miss having to pay for a fixed number of hours and then having to figure out what to do if I'm running late (or wasting money if I get back early). > 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. Unless the app is exceptionally horrible you can just export it to Apple/Android wallet which is muc…

Don’t people just print their boarding passes at home before they leave for the airport? Or worst case, use the kiosks at the airports which print passes? Very few of the passengers in line ahead of me are using their phones.

Depends on where you are. My experience in American airports is almost all apps, but Spain's Iberia, for example, is basically all paper, typically printed by the airline and not even someone at home. So for them, minimal changes over how flying worked in the 1990s.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#302

Post by SoftTalker »

svelle wrote: post #253
lambda wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm kind of puzzled by your first point. In my experience, parking apps require you to pay in larger chunks of hours than paying with coins used to; many times I have to pay for a minimum of 2 hours of parking with the app when I could pay for just 10 or 15 minutes of parking with coins.

The parking app I use in Berlin, easy park, works in the sense that I pre-select a timeframe I think im going to park which then gives me an estimate for how much it'll cost and reserve that amount using my CC. When I end the parking before that timer ends, the actual time I've parked will be taken and only that amount is charged. It used to be even better in the sense that you'd only start and then end parking witho…

Of course the apps could easily detect that parking has ended. They could note your location when you park. When the phone returns to that location, and then moves at driving speed, parking has ended.

But they don't because they make more money by profiting from people who forget to "clock out" when they are done parking.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#303

Post by RhysU »

internet2000 wrote: post #164
joshdavham wrote: post #127

I’m fascinated by this phenomenon of apps proposing solutions that are far worse than the previous existing solutions. For example: 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. 2. Tinder is worse than IRL speed dating. 3. Duolingo is worse than language classes. 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. 5. Etc It really makes me frustrated as someone who builds software and generally thinks…

I don't think I could disagree more with your number 4. Adding a boarding pass to Apple Wallet and having it update itself with gate changes, delays, etc, notifying you and even scribbling skeuomorphically what changed on the pass [0] has been one of the strongest delighters I've experienced in recent times. [0] https://i.imgur.com/OkthcOi.png

Are you not also paying attention to the gate itself and to departure boards? Why do you need your phone to tell you what's posted on numerous displays that you walk past?

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#304

Post by realityking »

OptionOfT wrote: post #214
pqtyw wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. I certainly don't agree with that one. I really don't miss having to pay for a fixed number of hours and then having to figure out what to do if I'm running late (or wasting money if I get back early). > 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. Unless the app is exceptionally horrible you can just export it to Apple/Android wallet which is muc…

I recently got bitten in the rear by Delta not updating boarding passes stored in Apple Wallet, even though it had / has all permissions to do so. Only when I checked the time and wondered why we weren't boarding yet, and opened the app did I notice that the gate changed. Even afterwards the one stored in Apple Wallet did not update. I even tried to do the pull-to-refresh. Eventually I pulled to refresh, and that wor…

To be fair, a printed boarding pass also didn’t update when the gate changed.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#305

Post by vladms »

cbozeman wrote: post #271
ComposedPattern wrote: post #245

It's funny how people in this thread keep saying "well if you're going to complain about people being penalized for not using apps, you might as well complain about people being penalized for not using telephones/cars/internet"... and yes, I am going to complain about all of those things. I imagine that many or most homeless people don't have reliable access to any of the above. I have an anxiety disorder that makes…

[flagged]

> I don't like paying taxes.

If we replace "taxes" with "paying for an army, paying for police, etc." than the above statement seems strange. I can understand "I don't like what society choose to build (with the taxes)", but some things can't be let to the free market.

> I have to go do the fucking IRS's job

That's a society choice. I have no experience with IRS, but other countries have tax systems that are much more automatic (come prefilled with most info for example). But taxes are maybe a bit higher (because if you don't do the job, someone needs to maintain the systems that allow the automation).

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#306

Post by noqc »

crazygringo wrote: post #237
tokioyoyo wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m gonna say something stupid — the chances of my phone running out of battery and me not being able to charge it is lower than me losing the paper ticket.

Not stupid at all. I think that's the case for most people. It's easy to lose a random piece of paper. Whereas people are generally extremely aware of where their phone is at all times.

It's not that hard to maintain a random piece of paper, you do it with your ID, which presumably you do not keep on your phone. It is much harder to ensure an iPhone won't randomly be miscalibrated and shut off at 30%.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#307

Post by rglover »

joshdavham wrote: post #127

I’m fascinated by this phenomenon of apps proposing solutions that are far worse than the previous existing solutions. For example: 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. 2. Tinder is worse than IRL speed dating. 3. Duolingo is worse than language classes. 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. 5. Etc It really makes me frustrated as someone who builds software and generally thinks…

> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters.

Generally, yes, (it may have improved since I left but the Chicago one was a nightmare a few years back) however the best experience I've ever had was in Nashville (don't recall the company name).

I signed up via the web (no app) and then the parking lot has cameras/sensors that detect my plate. Any parking lot owned by that company is now accessible to me in the city. I can just pull in, it detects me (notifying me my "session" has started), and then charges my card on file when I pull out (either in an hour, or even the next day).

As with a lot of things, there are often examples of well-executed solutions at the fringes, they're just not deployed at a large enough scale to cancel out the other negative examples. Software can improve a lot, but it's down to the team/individuals involved to care enough to do it right (and not be distracted by other incentives).

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#308

Post by fundingshovel »

kccqzy wrote: post #189
joshdavham wrote: post #127

I’m fascinated by this phenomenon of apps proposing solutions that are far worse than the previous existing solutions. For example: 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. 2. Tinder is worse than IRL speed dating. 3. Duolingo is worse than language classes. 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. 5. Etc It really makes me frustrated as someone who builds software and generally thinks…

I've seen good airline apps and bad airline apps. The good ones allow you to do things like checking your own bags and dropping off bags without talking to anyone. The bad ones simply are slow and have missing features: you may be able to buy a ticket but changing it requires calling a number. (Of course if you are the type to prefer human customer service, these won't appeal to you.)

Even if you do they might? Good service in app can lead to shorter wait times for people that need to talk to humans

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#309

Post by Henchman21 »

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #274
Henchman21 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m gonna punt on the question of where the line is for hostile actions and use some past legal justification of “I know it when I see it” and I see it clearly here. The second part is the more interesting question to me: Appropriate reactions would seem to include: - finding a new doctor/practice/provider. Super hard in practice as they seem to be geographical monopolies a la the cable networks - providing appropria…

Is stupidity instead of hardship a legally valid claim? Are cognitively disabled people, unable to operate a smartphone, a protected class?

If the entire world requires smartphones to take part and you are unable to use a smartphone you deserve some protection, yes.

If you see other options I’d be happy to hear them?

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#310

Post by hilbert42 »

ctrlp wrote: post #104
hilbert42 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Look at it this way: should the rest of us with smartphones pay for that bank office?" To answer that question with any degree of rigor one has to go back to the beginning and study the works of Bentham, Mill and others—and the many issues that surround utility and utilitarian principles. This involves such issues as the greatest good for the greatest number, greed overpowering well established moral norms and the f…

Utilitarian models of ethics are fraught with peril themselves. Not the own you think it is.

So are many other political and philosophical ideas—essentially any field involving ethics is fraught with perils and consensus is never fully reached.

Just because unanimity is never achieved in respect of some philosophical idea doesn't mean it's not worthy of consideration and or it's never put into practice. Utilitarianism has been the subject of much study and debate and it's been widely practiced over several hundred years.

I'm well aware of the debates over utilitarianism and its ethics, any why those for and against it take the (usually) entrenched stance that they do. That ought to have been obvious by my use of the word 'consensuses'.

BTW, I could have made the same argument from a different philosophical perspective but the previous commentator specifically invited a utilitarian-type response by the words he used. That said, no matter what philosophical argument I'd have used someone would have found fault with it.

My main point still stands, which is that obvious solutions aren't necessarily the optimal ones. Note, I've deliberately not used the word 'best' for the above reasons.

Post reply on HN