5 ms·
On 'empowers' - what has caused people to learn that empowerment hurts? On the data - I see that the last NIST was 2006, they cite one 2006 source, a 2008, and
by natep 16y ago
On 'empowers' - what has caused people to learn that empowerment hurts?
On the data - I see that the last NIST was 2006, they cite one 2006 source, a 2008, and a 2009. That seems pretty good to me, considering that the oldest one is a paper, and not an annual report.
On problems:solutions - their product is the solution, and they haven't launched it yet. They can't really describe something that hasn't launched yet.
On not knowing any better - two things.
(1) you underestimate how important timely feedback is. I can't find the link easily, but when people have a light installed in their home that goes red when they're using a lot of energy, and green otherwise, people conserve more energy. When you don't find out until the end of the month how much you used, you can't adjust (this is also covered in any controls class. Introducing a delay will usually cause instability)
(2) I have <$2k on my credit card (and pay it every month), and I hate how opaque things are. I have to log into my credit card site (already annoying) and ignore the big 'balance' number and hunt for the number that is what I have to pay. I can't imagine how hard it is for people that don't/can't pay their balance in full every month, automatically.
- bambax 16y agoEmpowerment is a word used by big companies (and found many times in Microsoft marketese) to tell people they are going to be more powerful if they use their tools, when in fact they are going to get screwed, and pay every penny for it. When you think about it, power is not given, and esp. not given from the powerful to the powerless. Power is something you take. The fact is that the "empowerer" is looking down on the "empoweree"; if we're talking about parents and children, then maybe that's fine; but if we're talking about companies and customers, or bosses and employees, then beware (better still: run). That's the issue that I have with this article: it sounds like ordinary marketing PR, and plays on two very different levels. "OMG! Debt is a big problem! And look! we've found a (secret and unique) way to solve it!" Debt is a little bit like smoking: on a national scale, it's a huge problem, very difficult to solve; but on a personal scale it's not really a "problem". You want to quit smoking? QUIT SMOKING. Those guys seem to be talking about debt at a high level (where solutions would be needed, but are hard to find) to sell their individual-level solutions (which are easy to find, and therefore not really needed, since if people really wanted to be out of debt, they wouldn't get into it in the first place).