6 ms·

This is a pretty fluff piece. There isn't really much explored here. The only interesting idea I can write out is that the author says that knowing the length/

by ibero 7y ago

This is a pretty fluff piece. There isn't really much explored here. The only interesting idea I can write out is that the author says that knowing the length/size of an article/book is intrinsically good. I do wonder if that is necessarily true. Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging?

ubu7737 7y ago
This is absolutely terrifying thinking. You seem to believe that readers are passive consumers of a stream, and should not have agency in their consumption of said streams.
- ibero 7y ago
  You got me. Readers "should not have agency in their consumption of said streams." Clearly that was the point of my question posing the alternative. You nailed it.
  - ubu7737 7y ago
    What I nailed is the idea of back-pressure. Removing the consumer's ability to use back-pressure mechanisms against excessive stream provision is an anti-pattern. Providers who want to maximize "engagement" do not care. This is known as "spam".
coldtea 7y ago
>This is a pretty fluff piece. There isn't really much explored here. It's not supposed to explore anything, be amusing, or whatever. It's just a rant about a certain specific UI trend. >The only interesting idea I can write out is that the author says that knowing the length/size of an article/book is intrinsically good That's not "the only interesting idea", in the sense that there were supposed to be more but are missing, or they are there but are not interesting. It is literally the one and only idea the author wanted to convey with this post. They didn't set out to explore some vast expanse of UI design ideas. Just to write a rant about the lack of scrollbars/indication of position. >I do wonder if that is necessarily true. Yes it is. >Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging? That's a problem for the content creator, not for the users...
- ibero 7y ago
  For one, I remember a Google talk where they mentioned how the completion rate of e-books were higher than physical ones. One of the theories which stuck with me was that the reader not being aware of the end of the book could have been* a driver.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Yeah, this might be true, but that's a problem for the content provider I think -- or even not even for them (since you have already bought their book).
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    How did they determine this? Last I checked, physical books didn't have telemetry.
bitwize 7y ago
Yes, one can argue that, at which point one would be considered a marketroid and not trusted.
jerf 7y ago
"Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging?" Boy, doesn't that just have the distinctive ring of an uncomfortable truth... at least for some of these cases. I offer in counterpoint that engagement-focused sites have probably already determined that their content is "less engaging" if it's long enough for a scrollbar to appear at all. If it wasn't for the literal need to stuff 100%+ of the screen with ads, there'd probably be a lot of modern engagement-focused websites doing everything they can to fit on a single screen without scrolling at all.
- ubu7737 7y ago
  When engagement is sold to advertisers, it's difficult to trust any changes to the UI. The scrollbar should be sacred. Otherwise everything will wind up with sliding-window advertisements.
JohnFen 7y ago
> Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging? Maybe, but valuing "engagement" over pleasing customers is a big part of what's wrong with a lot of software today.

by ibero 7y ago

ubu7737 7y ago

This is absolutely terrifying thinking. You seem to believe that readers are passive consumers of a stream, and should not have agency in their consumption of said streams.

ibero 7y ago
You got me. Readers "should not have agency in their consumption of said streams." Clearly that was the point of my question posing the alternative. You nailed it.
- ubu7737 7y ago
  What I nailed is the idea of back-pressure. Removing the consumer's ability to use back-pressure mechanisms against excessive stream provision is an anti-pattern. Providers who want to maximize "engagement" do not care. This is known as "spam".

coldtea 7y ago

>This is a pretty fluff piece. There isn't really much explored here. It's not supposed to explore anything, be amusing, or whatever. It's just a rant about a certain specific UI trend. >The only interesting idea I can write out is that the author says that knowing the length/size of an article/book is intrinsically good That's not "the only interesting idea", in the sense that there were supposed to be more but are missing, or they are there but are not interesting. It is literally the one and only idea the author wanted to convey with this post. They didn't set out to explore some vast expanse of UI design ideas. Just to write a rant about the lack of scrollbars/indication of position. >I do wonder if that is necessarily true. Yes it is. >Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging? That's a problem for the content creator, not for the users...

ibero 7y ago
For one, I remember a Google talk where they mentioned how the completion rate of e-books were higher than physical ones. One of the theories which stuck with me was that the reader not being aware of the end of the book could have been* a driver.
- coldtea 7y ago
  Yeah, this might be true, but that's a problem for the content provider I think -- or even not even for them (since you have already bought their book).
- JohnFen 7y ago
  How did they determine this? Last I checked, physical books didn't have telemetry.

bitwize 7y ago

Yes, one can argue that, at which point one would be considered a marketroid and not trusted.

jerf 7y ago

"Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging?" Boy, doesn't that just have the distinctive ring of an uncomfortable truth... at least for some of these cases. I offer in counterpoint that engagement-focused sites have probably already determined that their content is "less engaging" if it's long enough for a scrollbar to appear at all. If it wasn't for the literal need to stuff 100%+ of the screen with ads, there'd probably be a lot of modern engagement-focused websites doing everything they can to fit on a single screen without scrolling at all.

ubu7737 7y ago
When engagement is sold to advertisers, it's difficult to trust any changes to the UI. The scrollbar should be sacred. Otherwise everything will wind up with sliding-window advertisements.

JohnFen 7y ago

> Maybe one can argue that knowing the length of a written word has resulted in less people engaging? Maybe, but valuing "engagement" over pleasing customers is a big part of what's wrong with a lot of software today.