3 ms·

Top Ten List of Coder Excuses for Bad UI Design: 1. I understand the UI perfectly. The users must be stupid. 2. It's all spelled out perfectly clearly on page

Top Ten List of Coder Excuses for Bad UI Design: 1. I understand the UI perfectly. The users must be stupid. 2. It's all spelled out perfectly clearly on page three of the license agreement. ... Let me add one: 3. You have no privacy anyway; get over it. Anybody else want to add one? I'm still a bit short of ten, here. I note, with approval, that the Loopt folks were smart enough not to make excuses but to fall immediately into the Apologizer role: http://loopt.typepad.com/loopt/2008/07/iphone-invite-c.html http://loopt.typepad.com/loopt/2008/07/iphone-invite-c.html ... which, if we carefully parse Loopt's own description of the problem, seems to be entirely warranted: When you clicked the “Who’s on Loopt” button, all of your contacts that are current Loopt users were auto-selected to receive invites. A total count of people receiving invites appeared at the bottom of the screen. However, we have since disabled that functionality due to customer feedback and confusion. We are working on an improved invite flow that will include an invite confirmation screen that will be released very soon. "...will include an invite confirmation screen". Uh, yep, that could be the problem! It would be nice to provide more detailed bug reports, but it seems that we can't because Loopt treated this as an emergency and updated the app right away. Which was also very smart.

KirinDave 18y ago
All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with. Also, it seems weird to me that people are worried their number may reach advertisers. Unless you're extremely selective about who you call and you pay your carrier extra, your number will end up in the advertiser's hands. Odds are even if your number is "unlisted" you've been redflagged by someone that your credit card weaseled their way into selling. If we're going to complain about privacy in this modern phone-bound world, let's at least complain about the phenomenon and not specific expressions thereof. Loopt is just a scapegoat for the reactionary stance of people who are being suddenly immersed into the modern world of cellphone ownership.
- natrius 18y ago
  "All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with." And what we're saying is that you're wrong. I wouldn't be "irrevocably damaged" by what Loopt did, but I'd be pissed off. No one wants to be That Guy who spams people with invites to random services or Facebook app notifications. I hate That Guy.
- mechanical_fish 18y ago
  Loopt is just a scapegoat for the reactionary stance of people who are being suddenly immersed into the modern world of cellphone ownership. What, reactionaries like Justine Ezarik? http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/video-ijustine-.html http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/video-ijustine-.htm... http://www.technologyevangelist.com/2007/07/ijustines_lifecastin_2.html http://www.technologyevangelist.com/2007/07/ijustines_lifeca... Pull the other one. And we have another entry for the list: 4. We shouldn't try to fix this problem, because it's just a specific instance of a much more general problem that we also shouldn't try to fix. --- I do kind of agree with this: if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with Absolutely: Social networks that don't give you firm and clear control over who gets contacted are going to make this class of people flee in panic. The question is: How large is this class of people? It's probably larger than you think. For example, ask any woman who, like Justine, is justifiably afraid of being stalked. I'm afraid that such women are not very hard to find.
- misuba 18y ago
  "All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with." Another way of saying this: all SNSes are to be avoided if your social life has any subtleties to it at all. Which, if true - and it is so far - is A) pretty depressing, and B) a huge business opportunity for some brilliant UI thinkers who actually _don't_ subscribe to the Geek Social Fallacies. Read danah boyd, people.

KirinDave 18y ago

All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with. Also, it seems weird to me that people are worried their number may reach advertisers. Unless you're extremely selective about who you call and you pay your carrier extra, your number will end up in the advertiser's hands. Odds are even if your number is "unlisted" you've been redflagged by someone that your credit card weaseled their way into selling. If we're going to complain about privacy in this modern phone-bound world, let's at least complain about the phenomenon and not specific expressions thereof. Loopt is just a scapegoat for the reactionary stance of people who are being suddenly immersed into the modern world of cellphone ownership.

natrius 18y ago
"All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with." And what we're saying is that you're wrong. I wouldn't be "irrevocably damaged" by what Loopt did, but I'd be pissed off. No one wants to be That Guy who spams people with invites to random services or Facebook app notifications. I hate That Guy.
mechanical_fish 18y ago
Loopt is just a scapegoat for the reactionary stance of people who are being suddenly immersed into the modern world of cellphone ownership. What, reactionaries like Justine Ezarik? http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/video-ijustine-.html http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/08/video-ijustine-.htm... http://www.technologyevangelist.com/2007/07/ijustines_lifecastin_2.html http://www.technologyevangelist.com/2007/07/ijustines_lifeca... Pull the other one. And we have another entry for the list: 4. We shouldn't try to fix this problem, because it's just a specific instance of a much more general problem that we also shouldn't try to fix. --- I do kind of agree with this: if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with Absolutely: Social networks that don't give you firm and clear control over who gets contacted are going to make this class of people flee in panic. The question is: How large is this class of people? It's probably larger than you think. For example, ask any woman who, like Justine, is justifiably afraid of being stalked. I'm afraid that such women are not very hard to find.
misuba 18y ago
"All I'm saying is that if you're the kind of person who is irrevocably damaged by sending an SMS to someone, then these sorts of social networks shouldn't have been on your slate to begin with." Another way of saying this: all SNSes are to be avoided if your social life has any subtleties to it at all. Which, if true - and it is so far - is A) pretty depressing, and B) a huge business opportunity for some brilliant UI thinkers who actually _don't_ subscribe to the Geek Social Fallacies. Read danah boyd, people.