7 ms·

I bet if you look at polls from the 1990s about the internet, you'll find a lot of people saying they're just fine without it, thank you very much, and they pre

by gaur 10y ago

I bet if you look at polls from the 1990s about the internet, you'll find a lot of people saying they're just fine without it, thank you very much, and they prefer the warm, personal experience of calling up a real human to book their plane tickets or whatever instead of punching their credit card number into some newfangled machine. But in the end, people went ahead and developed more and more infrastructure for the internet regardless, and now most people couldn't live without it.

steego 10y ago
You don't have to go back that far. In 2007-2008, I remember polling friends and coworkers about smart phones. Just as you suggest, most said they were fine without it and didn't want to carry around a computer. I'd just read Kurzweil's book and I remember saying they'll probably have one by 2010-2011 because smart phones will be the free phones by then. I was right for one simple reason: Most people tend to dismiss new tech right up to when it stops becoming a luxury item. As soon as people find value in something and they can afford it, adoption is practically inevitable. I hope my self driving car has a nice sleeper option so I can take long road trips and wake up at my destination.
- junto 10y ago
  And in the same vein, "who on earth is going to buy a tablet"? The iPad is going to be a dud. Nobody needs or wants tablets. People don't know what they want, so we'll make them want it.
  - fucking_tragedy 10y ago
    I was under the impression iPad sales were dropping.
    - dpark 10y ago
      iPad sales may be dropping for any number of reasons. The number of tablets in the average home is climbing, regardless.
    - Normal_gaussian 10y ago
      You are correct [0]. For both iPad's and general tablet sales [1]. Of course this does not confirm that tablets are falling out of favour - they could simply have reached their saturation point. Does anybody know if saturation sales are expected to look like this normalish (gaussianish) graph? [0] http://www.statista.com/statistics/269915/global-apple-ipad-sales-since-q3-2010/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/269915/global-apple-ipad-... [1] http://www.statista.com/statistics/272070/global-tablet-shipments-by-quarter/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/272070/global-tablet-ship...
      - MawNicker 10y ago
        Yup. That looks like the first derivative of bounded growth. The integral of that graph would look like a logistic function [1]. It's often used to model population growth. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function
  - steego 10y ago
    Clearly tablet sales performed better than critics expected, but they never matched the phone because owning a phone significantly diminishes the value proposition of a tablet. Sales may get better as manufacturers figure out new ways to add value for the consumer or to successfully absorb the PC market.
- trhway 10y ago
  > In 2007-2008, I remember polling friends and coworkers about smart phones. Just as you suggest, most said they were fine without it and didn't want to carry around a computer. things changed when a computer appeared that people really liked to carry. The same wait is here - for the iPhone of autonomous cars. What right now drives around in Mountain View seems to be more like HP Treo.
  - jxdjsks 10y ago
    You really think people will prefer driving themselves to work rather than kicking back and doing whatever they fancy on the way? Driving a long distance? Punch in the destination and get some sleep, glorious This does not need any shiny packaging to be a no brainer. It's a drop dead delicious invention. That some even entertain the notion that they don't want one goes to show how clueless people are. They are just saying what they think everyone else thinks, without engaging thier brain.
duaneb 10y ago
> I bet if you look at polls from the 1990s about the internet, you'll find a lot of people saying they're just fine without it, thank you very much, and they prefer the warm, personal experience of calling up a real human to book their plane tickets or whatever instead of punching their credit card number into some newfangled machine. The enjoyment of driving is not about human warmth, it's about control and adrenaline. I don't think the comparison makes sense. I'd be more excited about autonomous cars if I could turn it off in the country (as some cars today allow) for recreation. I definitely agree with what you're saying—I know I'm probably in the minority for enjoying driving at all—but I frankly can't imagine anyone enjoying reading their credit card over the phone.
- helloworld12345 10y ago
  I'm sure someone said the same thing about horses. They love the experience of riding a horse.
  - qbrass 10y ago
    If someone had invented self-driving horses, we could have skipped the whole car thing. Is Waze for horses patentable?
    - zardo 10y ago
      Prior art in camels: http://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/dc/16/000016dc_medium.jpeg http://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/dc/16/000016dc_medium.jpeg
  - spc476 10y ago
    The thing about a horse though, is that it knows the way home. You might think that this means you can get drunk and still have a way to "ride" home. I mean, that has to be better than driving drunk, right? The US laws are crazy: http://duiwise.com/dui-dwi-answers/can-you-get-a-dui-dwi-on-a-horse/ http://duiwise.com/dui-dwi-answers/can-you-get-a-dui-dwi-on-...
  - duaneb 10y ago
tpeo 10y ago
Well, each of those things created new unforeseen problems, such as cyber-crime (and, I believe, a decline of quality in journalism). On the other hand, none of them actually presented the possibility of direct physical harm, which might occur with failure in autonomous vehicles. And which is something people are wary about. In my own opinion, being a passenger in a self-driving vehicle wouldn't be riskier than being a passenger in a normal vehicle. On the contrary, I think it's safer. But there's the issue of how human drivers might behave or be forced to behave once self-driving cars become widespread. What if human drivers' become more trusting of other cars' behavior and start paying less attention? Human drivers might become involved in worse crashes between themselves. What if there's an adverse selection effect? If the public is convinced that self-driving cars are safer for individual passengers, then the most risk-averse drivers might be more likely to join in, leaving less risk-averse (and prone to accident) drivers on the road. How would human drivers interact with platoons? What if a human driver is stuck in a suddenly decelerating platoon? Would he panic and swerve? Would he crash? My point is that there might be all kinds of unforeseen consequences. Maybe good, maybe bad. That's reason why I'm not particularly enthusiastic about self-driving cars (or anything else for that matter): we'll only know whether it's good or bad in hindsight.
antisthenes 10y ago
"If you asked people what they want, they'd ask for a faster horse"
- notJim 10y ago
  https://hbr.org/2011/08/henry-ford-never-said-the-fast https://hbr.org/2011/08/henry-ford-never-said-the-fast
- xkcd-sucks 10y ago
  If you asked people what they want, they'd ask for cloud-connected thermostats that fail ungracefully and stop working when their manufacturers get acquired
oconnore 10y ago
Honestly I would still rather call a real human to book plane tickets. In fact I would pay a premium for it. This stopped happening because humans are expensive, not because typing numbers into a 2 inch touchscreen keyboard is actually a better experience.
- yazaddaruvala 10y ago
  You dismiss the notion that price is "part of the user experience". If I can do something myself, in 5 mins, inconveniently, for free. Or spend 5 mins on a phone call, waiting for a human to do the same thing, for $10. I would call the latter a poor user experience.
- grahamburger 10y ago
  I'm sure you recognize this, but your opinion is far from universal. I have a few friends who share your opinion and it's certainly valid, but I have many more friends who are much happier to book a flight / pay a bill / shop for insurance etc. on a higher bandwidth medium than a phone call. (Myself included) There are still instance where the company really screws up their UX to the point where a phone call is preferable but it's becoming much less common in my experience.
  - ams6110 10y ago
    I think what GP is referring to is calling someone and saying "book me through to San Francisco on the 20th. I need to be there by 11:00am. Bye." That's what we mean by "calling someone to book a flight" i.e. an agent who will take your request and do the legwork. Not simply talking to someone at a call center and dictating everything you'd otherwise be typing into an online form.
    - dpark 10y ago
      That service is available. You can get virtual assistants to do this. You can get a credit card that offers this kind of concierge service. If you claim that this is the experience you want and that you are willing to pay for it, but you're still booking your flights on Expedia, then either you're lying to yourself or you're just not willing to pay enough.

by gaur 10y ago

steego 10y ago

You don't have to go back that far. In 2007-2008, I remember polling friends and coworkers about smart phones. Just as you suggest, most said they were fine without it and didn't want to carry around a computer. I'd just read Kurzweil's book and I remember saying they'll probably have one by 2010-2011 because smart phones will be the free phones by then. I was right for one simple reason: Most people tend to dismiss new tech right up to when it stops becoming a luxury item. As soon as people find value in something and they can afford it, adoption is practically inevitable. I hope my self driving car has a nice sleeper option so I can take long road trips and wake up at my destination.

junto 10y ago
And in the same vein, "who on earth is going to buy a tablet"? The iPad is going to be a dud. Nobody needs or wants tablets. People don't know what they want, so we'll make them want it.
- fucking_tragedy 10y ago
  I was under the impression iPad sales were dropping.
  - dpark 10y ago
    iPad sales may be dropping for any number of reasons. The number of tablets in the average home is climbing, regardless.
  - Normal_gaussian 10y ago
    You are correct [0]. For both iPad's and general tablet sales [1]. Of course this does not confirm that tablets are falling out of favour - they could simply have reached their saturation point. Does anybody know if saturation sales are expected to look like this normalish (gaussianish) graph? [0] http://www.statista.com/statistics/269915/global-apple-ipad-sales-since-q3-2010/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/269915/global-apple-ipad-... [1] http://www.statista.com/statistics/272070/global-tablet-shipments-by-quarter/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/272070/global-tablet-ship...
    - MawNicker 10y ago
      Yup. That looks like the first derivative of bounded growth. The integral of that graph would look like a logistic function [1]. It's often used to model population growth. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function
- steego 10y ago
  Clearly tablet sales performed better than critics expected, but they never matched the phone because owning a phone significantly diminishes the value proposition of a tablet. Sales may get better as manufacturers figure out new ways to add value for the consumer or to successfully absorb the PC market.
trhway 10y ago
> In 2007-2008, I remember polling friends and coworkers about smart phones. Just as you suggest, most said they were fine without it and didn't want to carry around a computer. things changed when a computer appeared that people really liked to carry. The same wait is here - for the iPhone of autonomous cars. What right now drives around in Mountain View seems to be more like HP Treo.
- jxdjsks 10y ago
  You really think people will prefer driving themselves to work rather than kicking back and doing whatever they fancy on the way? Driving a long distance? Punch in the destination and get some sleep, glorious This does not need any shiny packaging to be a no brainer. It's a drop dead delicious invention. That some even entertain the notion that they don't want one goes to show how clueless people are. They are just saying what they think everyone else thinks, without engaging thier brain.

duaneb 10y ago

> I bet if you look at polls from the 1990s about the internet, you'll find a lot of people saying they're just fine without it, thank you very much, and they prefer the warm, personal experience of calling up a real human to book their plane tickets or whatever instead of punching their credit card number into some newfangled machine. The enjoyment of driving is not about human warmth, it's about control and adrenaline. I don't think the comparison makes sense. I'd be more excited about autonomous cars if I could turn it off in the country (as some cars today allow) for recreation. I definitely agree with what you're saying—I know I'm probably in the minority for enjoying driving at all—but I frankly can't imagine anyone enjoying reading their credit card over the phone.

helloworld12345 10y ago
I'm sure someone said the same thing about horses. They love the experience of riding a horse.
- qbrass 10y ago
  If someone had invented self-driving horses, we could have skipped the whole car thing. Is Waze for horses patentable?
  - zardo 10y ago
    Prior art in camels: http://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/dc/16/000016dc_medium.jpeg http://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/dc/16/000016dc_medium.jpeg
- spc476 10y ago
  The thing about a horse though, is that it knows the way home. You might think that this means you can get drunk and still have a way to "ride" home. I mean, that has to be better than driving drunk, right? The US laws are crazy: http://duiwise.com/dui-dwi-answers/can-you-get-a-dui-dwi-on-a-horse/ http://duiwise.com/dui-dwi-answers/can-you-get-a-dui-dwi-on-...
- duaneb 10y ago

tpeo 10y ago

Well, each of those things created new unforeseen problems, such as cyber-crime (and, I believe, a decline of quality in journalism). On the other hand, none of them actually presented the possibility of direct physical harm, which might occur with failure in autonomous vehicles. And which is something people are wary about. In my own opinion, being a passenger in a self-driving vehicle wouldn't be riskier than being a passenger in a normal vehicle. On the contrary, I think it's safer. But there's the issue of how human drivers might behave or be forced to behave once self-driving cars become widespread. What if human drivers' become more trusting of other cars' behavior and start paying less attention? Human drivers might become involved in worse crashes between themselves. What if there's an adverse selection effect? If the public is convinced that self-driving cars are safer for individual passengers, then the most risk-averse drivers might be more likely to join in, leaving less risk-averse (and prone to accident) drivers on the road. How would human drivers interact with platoons? What if a human driver is stuck in a suddenly decelerating platoon? Would he panic and swerve? Would he crash? My point is that there might be all kinds of unforeseen consequences. Maybe good, maybe bad. That's reason why I'm not particularly enthusiastic about self-driving cars (or anything else for that matter): we'll only know whether it's good or bad in hindsight.

antisthenes 10y ago

"If you asked people what they want, they'd ask for a faster horse"

notJim 10y ago
https://hbr.org/2011/08/henry-ford-never-said-the-fast https://hbr.org/2011/08/henry-ford-never-said-the-fast
xkcd-sucks 10y ago
If you asked people what they want, they'd ask for cloud-connected thermostats that fail ungracefully and stop working when their manufacturers get acquired

oconnore 10y ago

Honestly I would still rather call a real human to book plane tickets. In fact I would pay a premium for it. This stopped happening because humans are expensive, not because typing numbers into a 2 inch touchscreen keyboard is actually a better experience.

yazaddaruvala 10y ago
You dismiss the notion that price is "part of the user experience". If I can do something myself, in 5 mins, inconveniently, for free. Or spend 5 mins on a phone call, waiting for a human to do the same thing, for $10. I would call the latter a poor user experience.
grahamburger 10y ago
I'm sure you recognize this, but your opinion is far from universal. I have a few friends who share your opinion and it's certainly valid, but I have many more friends who are much happier to book a flight / pay a bill / shop for insurance etc. on a higher bandwidth medium than a phone call. (Myself included) There are still instance where the company really screws up their UX to the point where a phone call is preferable but it's becoming much less common in my experience.
- ams6110 10y ago
  I think what GP is referring to is calling someone and saying "book me through to San Francisco on the 20th. I need to be there by 11:00am. Bye." That's what we mean by "calling someone to book a flight" i.e. an agent who will take your request and do the legwork. Not simply talking to someone at a call center and dictating everything you'd otherwise be typing into an online form.
  - dpark 10y ago
    That service is available. You can get virtual assistants to do this. You can get a credit card that offers this kind of concierge service. If you claim that this is the experience you want and that you are willing to pay for it, but you're still booking your flights on Expedia, then either you're lying to yourself or you're just not willing to pay enough.