The “problem” with humanity, if you want it in a nutshell, is that we can choose what to believe and we can choose to ignore a necessary activity for a fun one.
While we might expect that behavior from orangutans and chimpanzees, our closest relatives, we also see it all the time in humanity.
As Matt Thomas says in his classic article, “Why free software usability tends to suck”:
Translated from his somewhat delicate reference: people only do what they find fun.Volunteers hack on stuff which they are interested in, which usually means stuff which they are going to use themselves. Because they are hackers, they are power users, so the interface design ends up too complicated for most people to use.
The converse also applies. Many of the little details which improve the interface — like focusing the appropriate control when a window is opened, or fine-tuning error messages so that they are both helpful and grammatical — are not exciting or satisfying to work on, so they get fixed slowly (if at all).
MPT (archived)
Of course, this is a powerful motivational tool, if we can make things fun. But some just aren’t going to be. Our current means of controlling that is an economic system where some get to live the life divine and do the fun stuff, and others don’t have to. Mostly, it sorts them by competence, so it works better than the option, which is state assigned jobs and uniform rewards (raw socialism).
But there are still tasks that need doing, if we want our tools and technologies to be top notch.
It’s about completion: any job undertaken needs to be completed in whole, including interface and the difficult task of long-term design, including ancillary effects.
Even more than “fun,” we have a problem in that we can choose — using our big brains — to deny ideas or evidence that we find displeasing.
http://www.amerika.org/2009/social-r...-as-a-species/


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote

Bookmarks