4 ms·
Here's the problem with current trash UX: 1. Person walks up with trash in hand to 3 bins. Each bin has a poster with pictures of items which are meant for tha
by carwheel10 9y ago
Here's the problem with current trash UX:
1. Person walks up with trash in hand to 3 bins. Each bin has a poster with pictures of items which are meant for that bin.
Each person has to make O(n) comparisons for each of the bin and then make the closest judgment call.
Too exhausting, error prone and inefficient as each person is solving the classification problem for a given trash item over and over again.
Here's a simple solution to the problem above:
1. Setup a regulation that each article be simply labelled with a numeral marking: "1", "2" or "3".
Standardize each trash bin to be called bin #1, #2 or #3.
Each person simply throws the trash in the matching bin.
This moves the classification problem from the person to the time of manufacturing of the article. Also, the classification is only done once by experts and not by each person at the time of throwing away the article.
Also, reduces the classification problem for the person from O(n) to O(1).
Simple solution which solves the problem in elegant fashion.
- jaxn 9y agoYou completely miss the point of what he is saying. There is nothing intuitive about "1", "2", "3". Your proposed solution requires everyone to build expertise at throwing things away. You also open the system up to folklore about what the numbers mean and what should go in each bin. And that folklore is impossible to control and correct. It's fine if you want to build systems that way. They may be good and work well enough. But a more intuitive system will prevail at some point.
- et1337 9y agoJeesh, take it easy. I took the numbers to be rhetorical. Of course you'd want to use intuitive icons instead of just numbers. What I'm curious about is what kind of prevailing more intuitive system you had in mind.
- maxerickson 9y agoPlastic recycling uses numbers.
- carwheel10 9y agoIt doesn't have to be "1", "2" or "3" necessarily, it could be A, B or C or any other marker or some other icon. This system could be adaptable as well. So suppose, you have only 2 bins, say bins: #1 and #2. The article to be thrown is marked as #3. So, in the absence of the relevant bin, throw the article to the closest matching bin, in this case: #2. The system would be composed of simple rules that people can remember in obvious fashion. > You also open the system up to folklore about what the numbers mean and what should go in each bin. And that folklore is impossible to control and correct. I don't know what "folklore" means here. This efficiency of the system comes from standardization. It seems no different than rules at a traffic light intersection. One could argue that color of traffic lights could open up the system to folklore then?
- jacalata 9y agoWorks until you carry something into the area that wasn't made there. Where do I throw away the packaging from the Vietnamese cookies I bought while on vacation? Or what do you do when a new recycling process is now able to handle (imaginary example) aluminum, so it should move from cat 3 to cat 2?
- carwheel10 9y ago> Where do I throw away the packaging from the Vietnamese cookies I bought while on vacation? Of course there are corner cases to be handled. But what percentage of the trash is Vietnamese cookie box and Japanese candy wrappers? In these cases, the person uses their best judgment.