4 ms·

They’re amazing. I can’t imagine the process to ensure all the metrics are correct. Seems like you’d have to check every single little dial for accuracy. Insane

by pram 4y ago

They’re amazing. I can’t imagine the process to ensure all the metrics are correct. Seems like you’d have to check every single little dial for accuracy. Insane considering there’s hundreds. I assume there was one of these rooms for every reactor too, crazy.

klabb3 4y ago
There was an experiment that I forgot the origin of, but interesting nonetheless: A hospital used some standardized table on print papers as a medical journal summary. Doctors were apparently very quick at extracting relevant information. Some software engineers came along, and designed a computer system. Instead of this big table, they decided to put the most relevant information and display it first, like a list. This reduced visual clutter, and most non-doctors could now read it better. However, the doctors took longer to parse it than before, and didn’t like the new system. And they were the primary user after all. It turned out that the doctors had memorized were everything was supposed to be. With the new system, there was no way of finding a specific piece of information quickly, even though the total amount was reduced. The interesting thing here is that all solutions have hidden features, that are useful but we don’t even know that it’s there even if (and perhaps especially if) we use it every day. It seems as if our brains are extremely capable of spatial memory. Of course, there are more such examples, for instance fine motor skills (how would you like a keyboard which rearranged the keys depending on their frequency of use?) The reason why some of us find these control rooms almost soothing is precisely because modern technology have depraved us of these neglected features: things are in the same place, physical dials, everything is predictable. This is closely related to my hate against anything “smart”. In adding features (sometimes for good reason) product managers and engineers don’t consider that they’re removing hidden features, often related to predictability, that are much more valuable than the features they added.

by pram 4y ago

klabb3 4y ago

There was an experiment that I forgot the origin of, but interesting nonetheless: A hospital used some standardized table on print papers as a medical journal summary. Doctors were apparently very quick at extracting relevant information. Some software engineers came along, and designed a computer system. Instead of this big table, they decided to put the most relevant information and display it first, like a list. This reduced visual clutter, and most non-doctors could now read it better. However, the doctors took longer to parse it than before, and didn’t like the new system. And they were the primary user after all. It turned out that the doctors had memorized were everything was supposed to be. With the new system, there was no way of finding a specific piece of information quickly, even though the total amount was reduced. The interesting thing here is that all solutions have hidden features, that are useful but we don’t even know that it’s there even if (and perhaps especially if) we use it every day. It seems as if our brains are extremely capable of spatial memory. Of course, there are more such examples, for instance fine motor skills (how would you like a keyboard which rearranged the keys depending on their frequency of use?) The reason why some of us find these control rooms almost soothing is precisely because modern technology have depraved us of these neglected features: things are in the same place, physical dials, everything is predictable. This is closely related to my hate against anything “smart”. In adding features (sometimes for good reason) product managers and engineers don’t consider that they’re removing hidden features, often related to predictability, that are much more valuable than the features they added.