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

Nobody cares

grantslatton.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Nobody cares

#941

Post by BlueTemplar »

lqet wrote: post #610
azeirah wrote: post #210

> The McDonald's touch-screen self-order kiosk takes 27 clicks to get a meal. They try to up-sell you 3 times. Just let me pay for my fucking burger, Jesus Christ. The product manager, the programmer, the executives. None of these people care. I was working in this space! And I got fired for refusing to work on more upsell features for clients like Coca Cola and such. I don't want to work on adding fucking ADS into c…

> That is fucked up. Yes. Our local IKEA recently started doing this. During self-checkout, you have to click through hot dog, ice cream, cinnamon buns and drink offers, and the inevitable offer to get an IKEA family card before you are actually able to pay for your furniture. Seeing this after waiting in line for 10 minutes, navigating a sluggish, unresponsive touch screen terminal and unsuccessfully trying to scan…

Next time go to the cashier instead, and complain to them about the self-checkout terminal ??

Re: Nobody cares

#942

Post by Vampiero »

cowfriend wrote: post #817
suddenlybananas wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also it's terrifying for safety; way too easy to assault someone in complete darkness.

I suspect your terror comes from lack of familiarity with natural light outdoors, and is a product of always having the lights on plus not being out of a house often. The night is not 'complete darkness', we can generally see fairly well. Also, I suspect your presumption on assault risk and assault rates comes from media, which is designed around building fear. Fear sells. So I agree that you find the natural world t…

> Because the natural world is what we are fit for.

Good thing we live in cities then!

Re: Nobody cares

#943

Post by Vampiero »

GJim wrote: post #814
suddenlybananas wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also it's terrifying for safety; way too easy to assault someone in complete darkness.

Completely the opposite. Numerous studies show crime goes down when streetlights are turned off. Simply put, you don't get scrotes hanging about in groups up to no good without lights, and anybody who is walking around is carrying a torch, making it obvious what they are doing (e.g. if you are breaking into a house, needing a torch instead of using a streetlight makes it obvious to everybody what you are doing). No t…

> The real question to ask, is why people like yourself are 'terrified' [sic] of the dark.

Statistics show that people don't care about statistics but about confirmation bias and the media is eager to feed it.

Re: Nobody cares

#944

Post by maeil »

crabbone wrote: post #937
maeil wrote: post #921

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But, when I go to work, things change. Not only people around me don't care, they very much want everyone to not care, because that would show them in a bad light. In your country this starts way back in middle school, where this phenomenon is worse than I've seen in any other place. It would be incredibly surprising if this suddenly changed in the workplace when it's all people have ever known. As long as the cultu…

That's unsettling :( My son is in second grade now, so I haven't been exposed to the middle school realities yet. Thanks for the warning!

https://blogs.transparent.com/dutch/untranslatable-dutch-wor...

There's a large amount of peer pressure to idolize scraping by, and against actually doing your best and putting in effort. While this exists in certain other places too (see classic "jock vs nerd" Hollywood stereotypes), nowhere is it as widespread. Moreso than the intensity - which isn't particularly severe, in the sense that e.g. serious bullying isn't more common than in compare countries - it's how institutional it is that sets it apart, even among a lot of kids who have the potential to do very well and go places if they'd put in a little effort.

Of course YMMV and these things have a large degree of local variance, but there's a reason the linked term exists as a cultural phenemonon there.

Re: Nobody cares

#945

Post by Vampiero »

reddalo wrote: post #662
Qwertious wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue light is safer for cars - it gives slightly faster reaction times, and lower the chance of drivers falling asleep. The problem is that for pedestrians, the reaction-time is irrelevant, they're butt-ugly, and plenty of people go on night walks because they can't sleep but want to. Half of this article is basically about cities being overly car-centric.

In some ways, car-centric cities are like that because people don't care. "I'll just take my car, whatever". They don't care about traffic, pollution, accidents, etc.

Or maybe they care about getting to their destination in time and not wasting half a day just going from point A to point B on foot/by (shitty) public transportation, or they'll be fired.

Daily reminder that we live under capitalism where you're not allowed to just "take your time".

Re: Nobody cares

#946

Post by relistan »

Vampiero wrote: post #940
gizmo wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there are "reasonable justifications" for the shitty status quo, but that's kind of the point. Things are shitty for reasons but not for good reasons. The author points to Japan to illustrate that you do get measurably better results when people habitually try to do good work. We're not actually doomed to have crappy furniture, flimsy and buggy appliances, byzantine legal codes, ugly architecture, and hosti…

> The author points to Japan to illustrate that you do get measurably better results when people habitually try to do good work People in Japan habitually kill themselves because of their stupid work culture. Maybe that's not the best example.

That’s not limited to Japan.

And besides it’s a strange take to argue that you shouldn’t acknowledge good thing A because unrelated thing B is bad there.

Re: Nobody cares

#947

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

tqi wrote: post #425

Its ironic, because this dude doesn't seem to care enough to even the slightest bit of research to understand why any of these problems he highlights are the way they are, and lazily attributes everything to OTHER people not caring. LEDs last longer, are more energy efficient, and also reduce light pollution because they are more directional[1]. Took me 30 seconds to google. There are enormous design standards for de…

> this dude doesn't seem to care enough to even the slightest bit of research

It was a rant not a thesis. I get frustrated by a lot of what he talks about too and many of them could be made better and without much cost. It might even be a call to action, shine a light on the nonsense so people do better next time (hopeful thought).

Re: Nobody cares

#948

Post by tass »

quietbritishjim wrote: post #687
tass wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I live, even with streetlights, most people I see walking after dark carry a torch. It’s easier than ever to carry one.

Honest question: Do you mean that most pedestrians are actually using (not just carrying on their person) a torch while walking along lit streets? I have essentially never seen that where I live, except some joggers have lights attached to their clothing but that's just so others can see them better. I can't imagine street lighting in an urban/suburban area being so bad that that would be necessary. That's a terrible…

I mean I quite often see people holding a torch (or maybe a lit up phone) while they're walking.

I'm in an urban area, but it's not as well-lit as a downtown environment. There's street lights every 2-3 houses and they're not super bright.

I personally prefer this over a downtown-like bright environment since it makes it easier to sleep and the ambience is just better at night.

Re: Nobody cares

#949

Post by cassepipe »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #681
cassepipe wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok for LEDs and your general point but for the bike lane situation you are kind of shooting yourself in the foot : It's either non-standard compliant bike lane, which is a problem, or it is standard compliant and then it means that the standard is a broad, inflexible set of rules dictated from the top which is either too complicated for people in charge of the implementation or leaves them no room to adapt to a speci…

Maybe they would rather not have bikers bombing onto the sidewalk at 20 mph when they are going to be sharing that space with pedestrians. A sharp turn is a good way to prevent that. I assume there are several "bike lane ends" signs here, though, which should be an indication to slow down.

Fair enough.

On a side note, I would personally avoid sharing the sidewalk with pedestrians, keep my speed and remain on the road. I know it's legal in my country to bike on (not high-speed) road even if there is a bike lane available. I'd rather share space with the plentiful, the cars, and have them slow down a bit, which cost them nothing, than bothering pedestrians.

Re: Nobody cares

#950

Post by marcosdumay »

pastage wrote: post #929
marcosdumay wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article explicitly says cyclists crash there going at ~30 km/h.

Crashes are another thing, cars going 100 mph here is probably proportionally the same as the people trying to take that at 30 km/h. The streetview of the location makes it even worse than I thought especially looking at the history of the spot. https://maps.app.goo.gl/EcG7qKSNDDHjzWJk9

Hum... The bike lane seems to be designed to fill space and make the street run better, instead of being designed for being useful for riding bikes.

I can see why people get angry about it. But still, the article is asking for the wrong solution. And yeah, the people crashing on that fence at 30 km/h would just die hit by a car a few meters down if the article's fix was implemented.

Post reply on HN