5 ms·
User: This service has a problem and it's not working well. Programmer: There's nothing wrong with the service, you just have to use [magic incantation] to mak
by thaumaturgy 6y ago
User: This service has a problem and it's not working well.
Programmer: There's nothing wrong with the service, you just have to use [magic incantation] to make it work right.
I've been hoping for 20 years that this kind of exchange would stop happening. Still hoping! :-)
- npteljes 6y agoServices and users have different goals. Why is the helpful technologist the problem?
- grendix 6y agoYour second statement is enabling bad behavior, your first statement is insane.
- matthewdgreen 6y agoReal answer? Because helpful technologists are the interface between less knowledgeable users and services like Google. We’re the power users and “mavens” who are both highly exposed to the product and have some understanding of what’s going wrong and how it might be made better. We also spend a lot more time talking to that product’s engineering staff than the typical user (see e.g. the fact that we’re here on HN.) When helpful technologists opt out of the problematic aspects of a product by uttering some magic incantation, we essentially remove ourselves from having to be annoyed by the product’s rough edges. This means we’re less likely to help improve the service for everyone, and we’re probably more likely to incorporate similar carelessness into the things we make ourselves.
- edoceo 6y agoHow could a technologist, who's not in charge of the $BigTech be able to fix the problem? They can't. So, they offer the user a work-around. Then, the user never complains to $BigCo because of the Help and still nothing gets done. And later, we complain that we're not fixing $BigCo and we're all mad at "the help". How, really, could you improve the Google service for everyone?
- wizzwizz4 6y agoAcausal decision theory, given the assumption that you have the same decision-making algorithm as the technologists in charge of $BigTech. (The assumption's completely invalid, so it doesn't actually work.)
- matthewdgreen 6y agoHow many Google Search* engineers saw this article on HN? I guarantee the number is greater than zero. * Or people who talk to Search engineers regularly, etc.
- npteljes 6y agoI see your point. Working around abusive behaviour, and accepting that as a solution, just enables further abuse. I don't think we can influence said engineers here on HN. I know for a fact that I personally wouldn't be influenced, and I also think that if the product managers will want something, then it will get done, no matter what people write here.
- kenniskrag 6y ago"Programmer" here is wrong. Because we are all user of the product "google search". But yes I see your point. I call it the "permanent workaround"
- IanCal 6y agoAnd there's always this kind of response. They didn't say the service was fine, they just provided a simple workaround which doesn't require forcing a change to Google's algorithm. Hoping they don't help with this seems odd. So, to counter, I'm glad that they did say this as it regularly annoys me too.
- xg15 6y agoIt's indeed a useful tip - and no offense to the GP - but this kind of reply always feels like the tech support equivalent of a mandatory arbitration clause: like an attempt to solve an issue individually with each person reporting it instead of giving a systemic solution that would benefit anyone. The blame is shifted from devs providing a good service to individual users not knowing the latest workaround.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- makapuf 6y agoMost probably the devs know how to do it but specs written by someone else told them to obfuscate useful functionality.
- tshaddox 6y agoBut no one said that there’s nothing wrong with the service. They merely offered a very simple workaround. I can’t imagine why you’d hope for that to stop happening.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- amelius 6y agoGoogle: we need your personal information so we can improve your experience User: -pinterest Google: we need your personal information so we can improve your experience User: -pinterest!! et cetera, ad infinitum ...
- jedberg 6y agoI think your premise is wrong. The service isn't broken. I'd assume Google has enough people and data to know that it's doing what most people want. They were even kind enough to put in a workaround for the minority for whom it doesn't work well (which appears to be OP).
- xg15 6y agoMost people want to have a full result page of nothing but login walls when searching for any kind of image?
- jedberg 6y agoMost people who click on Pinterest links are already logged into Pinterest...
- abc-xyz 6y agoThere’s no way that’s true. I’d be surprised if even 1% of the Google users paid attention to the source site underneath the image. And you’d think people with a Pinterest account would opt to search on their website/app rather than going through Google (thus making it even more unlikely that the Google user has a Pinterest account).
- alisonkisk 6y agoPinterest has a huge user base. They don't need to look at the source if they have an account; the link will work fine. And, no, most people don't bother picking a site before searching. Why would they artificially limit their results? People don't even visit amazon before searching for Amazon products.
- abc-xyz 6y agoPinterest’s user-base is surely minuscule compared to the amount of users using Google Image Search. I’m not saying that 100% of all users with a Pinterest account use their website/app, but many of them will of course opt to use Pinterest’s website/app for their image searches, which means an even smaller percentage of the Google Image Search users will have a Pinterest account.
- njharman 6y agoUser: your thing doesn't work the specific way I want. I haven't read the manual and refuse to learn now to use its features. You should make it magically work the way I imagine. Multiply by 100 users with different opinions, all entitled, on how thing should work.
- gsich 6y agoWhy? This is a quick fix. Maybe the problem will get fixed "officially" someday. But I have the problem now, I need a workaround now, not in 5 years.