Scientists who make apps addictive
1843magazine.com
1843magazine.com
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 makes my gut turn a little bit. It is a blind and abusive dynamic and I think it is horribly wrong.
For a while, I've been pondering what ethically designed software looks like from a user's perspective. And, for the modern consumer I don't have any answers.
The obvious bits are "it allows the user to do what they need" (ie, send an email, or draw a picture, communicate with friends, etc), but I don't know how to disconnect the functionality from addictive design elements.
Does that mean a HN style interface, where you can look at what threads you've started, but with no notifications? Or something else?
One way to think about it is, does the software help the user achieve their goals without trying to change what their goals are? Even this gets fuzzy when you think about long-term and short-term goals. An exercise app that manipulates me to frustrate my short-term goal of being lazy and help me reach my long-term goal of being fit might be ethically good.
But there are many clear cases where the app's job (just like much of advertising) is not to give me what I want, it's to control what I want and make me want what the app developer wants me to do.
One way I measure this informally is by asking how I feel after I use an app and put it down. While I'm using it, it always feels good because that's how these programs are designed. But many apps leaving me with a linger feeling of regret afterwards, exactly like the feeling I get after binging on junk food or drinking too much the night before.
Those are the apps that are a problem.
Imagine your metrics are perfect. Think of what your goal is: to get that sweet $$$. Using metrics, you'll tune your app towards extracting as much value as possible from customer. Note that it's different from providing value to customer in exchange for money - the latter is just an early stage of the former, and as you optimize further (using your perfect metrics), the only way to squeeze out more profit is to start making user's life worse.
I don't see this happening in other industries. Do people responsible for radios or sunroofs or seat belts in cars take action to cause their features to be used more?
The modern crop of "addictive" apps are usually free so having "time spent" as a KPI helps bring in ad revenue, which is good for business.
If you feel manipulated, it means that you did not want to do something, but the UI expressed its opinion in a way that was strong enough for you to notice it.
If the UI expresses its opinion in a way that aligns with your intentions, it gets called easy-to-use, unobtrussive, frictionless, and other nice-to-hear words.
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 your own opinion.
Many tools that used to be a) now are becoming b) which is nice because it can increase power and productivity for everyone, but the experts and pro's are left behind... What's even worse for them is these simplified tools are often not created by domain experts...
That concerns me about the progress in AI. It won't be used to help us but mainly to manipulate us.
It's not nice overall, because as those b) tools push out a) tools, it creates an artificial ceiling. Sure, it may be nice to enable a random person to do a new thing for the first time in their lives, but it's not nice if your software prevents those who want to do that thing more than once from being able to do it faster and better. Toys are more approachable than tools, but good works happens with tools; when almost all software tools become toy-like, we have a problem.
-- Alan Kay
Long time ago, the default was often whatever was easiest to program or took up the fewest compute resources: the variable is zero initialized by the OS, so therefore the setting will default to off.
Then, the rule became: the default should be the way most users will want to use the software.
Now, it’s: the default should be whatever causes the user to take the action that the developer wants them to take.
We are also seeing software with fewer and fewer settings. Developers are simply taking away the option and forcing users to do it the way the developer wants. This trend is aided and abetted by the current crop of ‘minimalist’ UI designers who insist that settings are bad and nothing should be user configurable.
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.
A software that don't want you to use it? Very stupid
After all that's what the creators always wanted, sometimes more, sometimes less successful. Thinking of myself, I found technology much more addictive 15-20 years ago. I cannot seriously imagine myself playing these very stupid online games that are full of add-ons you need to buy and weird, unnecessary instructions to 'guide' the user.
Most really addictive things were created by accident like Flappy bird or HN.
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 last week we looked at something totally unrelated and a lot of you got back to me with a request for how to do this one simple thing. (Montage of comments asking how to do one simple thing.) Well have no fear because Justin is here. All you're going to need is what you put in the search field, and today for this demonstration I'm also going to put in a totally unrelated product from our sponsor in a vaguely related industry. If you want to check out more information check the links below. Okay, let's get started. So, this is what you searched for. Have you ever wondered how to do the thing you searched for? Like this. Okay ready? This. And, there you have it. Now to finish this up I'm going to also go ahead and do this, this, and this, and.. voila. The picture in the thumbnail. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and if you liked this video be sure to tell all your friends. Thanks again to unrelated products for their generous support. Got anything YOU want to see on this channel? Just leave a comment below. And as always, stay beautiful/fantastic/ amazing/smart/awesome/ productive/strong/etc."
I'm not sure what the right micropayment model is for 5 second tutorials but if some video site found it I would put that URL straight into the browser and search there.
don't know if I'm serious or not.
Let that A.I. figure out tutorials based on what people search for.
Maybe I also have a rebound effect against certain platforms/apps/digital jails... How many sharing this around here?
Anyway, seriously: in the history we (as society) learn to distinguish good and bad things, generally the hard way, we develop society-antibodies for many "bad things". Unfortunately actual rapid growth of corporatocracy, while it's not nothing new under the sun, it's evolved quicker than society capacity to metabolize it and that's a real big danger for us all.
At nazi times it's easy to identify "the enemy" if someone go bomb you, go invade your country, have clear uniforms, symbols, clearly state that want to dominate the world it's easy to understand that's not good. But "new enemies" learned that well, they suppress symbols, they ceased to appear a unique body (of course, they are not, but even original nazi are not a unique body, have had they internal fight etc) they do not say they want to conquer anything but only "having success", like anybody want... Well for the mean, typical biped that's not much evident. Especially since actual "humans" disappear being presented as "platforms" with unclear propriety, with tons of different commercial brands that belong to a sole subject but most people do not know or if they appear in person they present themself as "genius in it's lab", young happy hippy that "work for a better world".
And even worse, ancient dictatorship require strong power to stay and evolve, actual corporatocracy do not. They simply remains as the sole option to buy services or products. They do not have to prohibit something "free" like open PCs, open cars etc, they simply stop to produce them after having bought any possible other producer, substituting them with jails but well presented, well colored and of course "for our safety".
Panem et circense always pay, at least as long as people can survive or have a bit of something to loose.
At the beginning I kept checking, but eventually the need dies off, at least in my case. Anything actually important will be a call.
Disabling notification for few hours at a time is a great idea. I will give it a shot.
Some of the more disturbing parts are when he highlights forum posts about targeting whales and people who say things like "I have to do every challenge and every side quest and it takes away from my enjoyment of the game" and "I've restarted this game hundreds of times because my character isn't perfect".
The whole idea of continuously giving your users content so that they can passively scroll down and be entertained is just like putting users in a box where they can pull a lever to get food. When users are given all these options without having to think and to actively search for them, they just become vegetables.
$$$$ and/or personality disorders I imagine