4 ms·

I also did tech support in a hospital. I'm not sure IT is a value add in that environment, at least not as much as IT thinks it is. Nurses are busy doing thin

by mulmen 3y ago

I also did tech support in a hospital. I'm not sure IT is a value add in that environment, at least not as much as IT thinks it is. Nurses are busy doing things like saving lives and caring for people experiencing the worst day of their life. On top of that nurses have to deal with poorly implemented and maintained workstations. Then when they ask for help the very people who created the problem in the first place come and belittle them. I'm not accusing you of anything. Just noting my own perception that IT people tend to be very smug and see the world from an IT-centric perspective. Nurses aren't dumb and they certainly aren't lazy. They just have better things to do with their time than deal with inconsequential IT issues. As I recall everything in the hospital that was actually critical to providing care had some specialist that maintained the system. The computer running the MRI machine wasn't bound to Active Directory and might not even be on the network. Issues with it were routed to GE, not the guy that fixes printers.

tiffanyg 3y ago
Ha - I know where you're coming from, but, like every opinionated SOB on this site, can't help but throw in my own opinion*: 1) The parent comment seems completely neutral and non-judgmental. Seems quite just "I had this experience", essentially a set of facts (compared to frequent enough comments that possibly really ought to generate a response / "note of approbation"). 2) Stereotypes are the epitome of judgmental thinking, language, attitudes, etc. That may sound judgmental itself, and I apologize for that - that's due, in part, to connotation "issues" with words we use (although, I can't, obviously, claim that even removing those removes all of that issue - I am literally labeling and characterizing strictly in denotation). To be fair, people, in general, can be very smug. In my experience, there has been an "enrichment" of that in "IT", but, for example, try talking to some of the especially high-ranking surgeons, say ... or, certain professors. In particular, I've personally come across a somewhat bimodal distribution, I think. Some people who reach "very high levels of expertise" are very humble ("right-sized" - not subservient or etc.) and super nice (surprisingly willing to help and talk to even "the layman" / "novice"). Then, there are the outright "arrogant bastards". So, to add some kind of summation - calling out "IT people" specifically, and especially the parent comment ... well, what's the point? Again - not meant to be rhetorical or aggressive ... but, I think many would agree that people in general should cut that $h1t out. This opinion brought to you by my "Big Giant Head... remember, when you're thinking of giant heads, think [my] Big Giant Head..."** * Which, we all know is likely to be comparable to ... something else everyone's got. Though, I'm telling myself, of course, that I've got something useful to say. "Caveat lector". :) ** With apologies to the writers and other people involved in making "3rd Rock from the Sun"
- rat9988 3y ago
  You are way too apologetic with the original post. It was not just a set of facts. You could feel the superior attitude. It's kind of obvious in the last sentence. The person you answer did well to call it out.
  - richie_adler 3y ago
    I read the post in Mastodon with a tone of amused incredulity at the unusual situation. Yes, some unusual habits of the professor may have contributed, but I don't read any negative judgement there. Somebody got burned too many times with IT people, I think.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
ShakataGaNai 3y ago
Every group of people who's remotely decently specialized... will get very smug assholes. I've met IT people who just want to help you get your shit done, and those who look down at you for being a "stupid user". Also I've met Doctors whom think they are god, and Doctor's who want to be a partner in your health journey and are totally non-judgemental (at least outwardly). I'm sure you'd find the same in any similar field. Engineers. Pilots. Mechanics. Nurses. And yes, everyone looks at the world from their personally centric view of the world. It's the only way we, as humans, know how. After all, how would you get to your oh-so-important job if not for the road engineer, or the mechanic who built your car, or the city designer who designed the routes that you use every day. Some are more aware of main character syndrome [1] than others... and some are just less assholes than others. [1] https://www.cxomedia.id/human-stories/20220722170529-74-175667/get-to-know-main-character-syndrome https://www.cxomedia.id/human-stories/20220722170529-74-1756...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- nuancebydefault 3y ago
  Thanks for sharing the interesting article!
sublinear 3y ago
> They just have better things to do with their time than deal with inconsequential IT issues. I understand a nurse shouldn't need to be a computer expert, but where to draw the line? I'm not a car guy, but I am expected to maintain a working vehicle and obey the rules of the road. I'm not a nurse, but am expected to comply with their instructions and understand to some degree what they're doing while under their care.
- Brian_K_White 3y ago
  And because of that, all the important interfaces to cars are standardized so that anyone can operate any car. Not just for convenience or even for efficiency but for literal safety. But the winshield wiper control might be anywhere and take any form, and because of that it's frequently got wrong and fumbled. This monitor setting menu button is just the stupid widshield wiper knob. Neither the nurse nor the monitor manufacturer nor the IT industry as a whole needs to do anything about it, for this particular example. But there are infinite other examples where the random haphazard thoughtless unaccountable inconsiderate nature of everything in IT is at fault and not all the users.
vjk800 3y ago
The original comment didn't read very smug to me, but more generally you have a point. Most people (maybe all of us?) have much better things to do than learn quirks of Windows. It really is the software/computer manufacturer or maintainers fault when things work in an unexpected way. I mean, why do we even have general purpose computers and operating systems on machines designed to do one single job (like medical equipment)? why does the system menu even exist in a setup where it's never needed? The only reason is that the computer and software industry is really a duct taping industry where stuff just gets slapped together in a way that's easiest for whoever is doing the duct taping - not in a way that's easiest for the user or the best for the actual application. In no other engineering discipline would this shit fly; imagine building a bridge and just constructing it from rocks, old cars and whatever scrap they happened to have lying around the construction site and then fixing it on the go as some of that crap quite predictably falls apart. This is basically what all of computer/software industry is doing.
- friendzis 3y ago
  While there may be some truth in your comment, you do miss the entire point. General purpose computers with general purpose operating systems on them are exactly what it sounds: general purpose. A PC would be comparable to a CNC mill in metal workshop. Operator needs certain base level of knowledge and skill to use the machine safely and purposefully. In fact, general purpose computers, "enterprise" controls on them and end user programs are so unimaginably good and miraculously robust that people with little to no formal training and very vague understanding of operational concerns of the system can use the system to consistently yield net positive result. Even when users actively try to bend the systems in ways they are explicitly not expected to be bent. I don't know whether this is because of or despite the systems being duck taped from scrap, but nevertheless these systems are amazingly resilient and fool proof. > In no other engineering discipline would this shit fly; imagine building a bridge and just constructing it from rocks, old cars and whatever scrap they happened to have lying around the construction site and then fixing it on the go as some of that crap quite predictably falls apart. This is basically what all of computer/software industry is doing. On the other hand, in no other engineering discipline engineers and operators are expected to provide a pedestrian bridge that is movable, can quickly scale to support military column and be able to support opening parade before foundation is poured. In no other engineering discipline you start building a façade and figure out internals later, based on use. The more I understand inner workings of computer systems, the more I am amazed at how they do not collapse under their own weight and remain operational.
friendzis 3y ago
I have first hand experience with hospital IT. > Nurses aren't dumb and they certainly aren't lazy. They just have better things to do with their time than deal with inconsequential IT issues. I don't want to reduce this discussion to name calling. Absolute majority of my tickets were along the lines of "user entered shit data and now they are getting shit data out, help". A minority of users would put in effort to thoroughly document actual state of affairs. Huge portion of users just did the bare minimum to tick a mental box "I did a thing". If they could find a way to discharge patient from their unit with lowest number of clicks/keypresses they would do that, even if it meant marking the patient as deceased (not much of a hyperbole, by the way). > Nurses are busy doing things like saving lives and caring for people experiencing the worst day of their life. That's the problem with medical personnel. They see the immediate act of "saving lives", e.g. putting a patient in a scanner ASAP, as their only job. All the documentation stuff is usually seen as a hindrance, sometimes as a way to cover someone's ass. Under very rare circumstances it is seen as an integral part of patient care. How do I know that? Every implementation of rule checks would be met with backlash rather than appreciation for an extra pair of robotic eyes.
- gregshap 3y ago
  This. Same as software engineers doing production support. It's easy to glorify putting out fires and hard to take credit for careful attention that prevents fires. Preventing fires extends a lot more lives.
- Propelloni 3y ago
  >"user entered shit data and now they are getting shit data out, help" [...] > If they could find a way to discharge patient from their unit with lowest number of clicks/keypresses they would do that, even if it meant marking the patient as deceased (not much of a hyperbole, by the way). That's a classic, not only in hospital IT. Apparently you expect the user to serve the process and not the other way around. That's not how it works. If the goal of the user (or the organisation) is to do as much of X as possible (maybe even incentivized) the process better facilitates that or it will be abused and/or circumvented.
  - 3y ago
danielrhodes 3y ago
I see this in a lot of software. Any software person wants to solve a problem, but their solution becomes a part of their own ego such that in their mind it is the cornerstone of the entire business, whether that's true or not. However, the person they're solving it for just wants to get something done - they don't want software in their way. The best software should is as invisible to the end user as possible.

by mulmen 3y ago

tiffanyg 3y ago

Ha - I know where you're coming from, but, like every opinionated SOB on this site, can't help but throw in my own opinion*: 1) The parent comment seems completely neutral and non-judgmental. Seems quite just "I had this experience", essentially a set of facts (compared to frequent enough comments that possibly really ought to generate a response / "note of approbation"). 2) Stereotypes are the epitome of judgmental thinking, language, attitudes, etc. That may sound judgmental itself, and I apologize for that - that's due, in part, to connotation "issues" with words we use (although, I can't, obviously, claim that even removing those removes all of that issue - I am literally labeling and characterizing strictly in denotation). To be fair, people, in general, can be very smug. In my experience, there has been an "enrichment" of that in "IT", but, for example, try talking to some of the especially high-ranking surgeons, say ... or, certain professors. In particular, I've personally come across a somewhat bimodal distribution, I think. Some people who reach "very high levels of expertise" are very humble ("right-sized" - not subservient or etc.) and super nice (surprisingly willing to help and talk to even "the layman" / "novice"). Then, there are the outright "arrogant bastards". So, to add some kind of summation - calling out "IT people" specifically, and especially the parent comment ... well, what's the point? Again - not meant to be rhetorical or aggressive ... but, I think many would agree that people in general should cut that $h1t out. This opinion brought to you by my "Big Giant Head... remember, when you're thinking of giant heads, think [my] Big Giant Head..."** * Which, we all know is likely to be comparable to ... something else everyone's got. Though, I'm telling myself, of course, that I've got something useful to say. "Caveat lector". :) ** With apologies to the writers and other people involved in making "3rd Rock from the Sun"

rat9988 3y ago
You are way too apologetic with the original post. It was not just a set of facts. You could feel the superior attitude. It's kind of obvious in the last sentence. The person you answer did well to call it out.
- richie_adler 3y ago
  I read the post in Mastodon with a tone of amused incredulity at the unusual situation. Yes, some unusual habits of the professor may have contributed, but I don't read any negative judgement there. Somebody got burned too many times with IT people, I think.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

ShakataGaNai 3y ago

Every group of people who's remotely decently specialized... will get very smug assholes. I've met IT people who just want to help you get your shit done, and those who look down at you for being a "stupid user". Also I've met Doctors whom think they are god, and Doctor's who want to be a partner in your health journey and are totally non-judgemental (at least outwardly). I'm sure you'd find the same in any similar field. Engineers. Pilots. Mechanics. Nurses. And yes, everyone looks at the world from their personally centric view of the world. It's the only way we, as humans, know how. After all, how would you get to your oh-so-important job if not for the road engineer, or the mechanic who built your car, or the city designer who designed the routes that you use every day. Some are more aware of main character syndrome [1] than others... and some are just less assholes than others. [1] https://www.cxomedia.id/human-stories/20220722170529-74-175667/get-to-know-main-character-syndrome https://www.cxomedia.id/human-stories/20220722170529-74-1756...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
nuancebydefault 3y ago
Thanks for sharing the interesting article!

sublinear 3y ago

> They just have better things to do with their time than deal with inconsequential IT issues. I understand a nurse shouldn't need to be a computer expert, but where to draw the line? I'm not a car guy, but I am expected to maintain a working vehicle and obey the rules of the road. I'm not a nurse, but am expected to comply with their instructions and understand to some degree what they're doing while under their care.

Brian_K_White 3y ago
And because of that, all the important interfaces to cars are standardized so that anyone can operate any car. Not just for convenience or even for efficiency but for literal safety. But the winshield wiper control might be anywhere and take any form, and because of that it's frequently got wrong and fumbled. This monitor setting menu button is just the stupid widshield wiper knob. Neither the nurse nor the monitor manufacturer nor the IT industry as a whole needs to do anything about it, for this particular example. But there are infinite other examples where the random haphazard thoughtless unaccountable inconsiderate nature of everything in IT is at fault and not all the users.

vjk800 3y ago

The original comment didn't read very smug to me, but more generally you have a point. Most people (maybe all of us?) have much better things to do than learn quirks of Windows. It really is the software/computer manufacturer or maintainers fault when things work in an unexpected way. I mean, why do we even have general purpose computers and operating systems on machines designed to do one single job (like medical equipment)? why does the system menu even exist in a setup where it's never needed? The only reason is that the computer and software industry is really a duct taping industry where stuff just gets slapped together in a way that's easiest for whoever is doing the duct taping - not in a way that's easiest for the user or the best for the actual application. In no other engineering discipline would this shit fly; imagine building a bridge and just constructing it from rocks, old cars and whatever scrap they happened to have lying around the construction site and then fixing it on the go as some of that crap quite predictably falls apart. This is basically what all of computer/software industry is doing.

friendzis 3y ago
While there may be some truth in your comment, you do miss the entire point. General purpose computers with general purpose operating systems on them are exactly what it sounds: general purpose. A PC would be comparable to a CNC mill in metal workshop. Operator needs certain base level of knowledge and skill to use the machine safely and purposefully. In fact, general purpose computers, "enterprise" controls on them and end user programs are so unimaginably good and miraculously robust that people with little to no formal training and very vague understanding of operational concerns of the system can use the system to consistently yield net positive result. Even when users actively try to bend the systems in ways they are explicitly not expected to be bent. I don't know whether this is because of or despite the systems being duck taped from scrap, but nevertheless these systems are amazingly resilient and fool proof. > In no other engineering discipline would this shit fly; imagine building a bridge and just constructing it from rocks, old cars and whatever scrap they happened to have lying around the construction site and then fixing it on the go as some of that crap quite predictably falls apart. This is basically what all of computer/software industry is doing. On the other hand, in no other engineering discipline engineers and operators are expected to provide a pedestrian bridge that is movable, can quickly scale to support military column and be able to support opening parade before foundation is poured. In no other engineering discipline you start building a façade and figure out internals later, based on use. The more I understand inner workings of computer systems, the more I am amazed at how they do not collapse under their own weight and remain operational.

friendzis 3y ago

I have first hand experience with hospital IT. > Nurses aren't dumb and they certainly aren't lazy. They just have better things to do with their time than deal with inconsequential IT issues. I don't want to reduce this discussion to name calling. Absolute majority of my tickets were along the lines of "user entered shit data and now they are getting shit data out, help". A minority of users would put in effort to thoroughly document actual state of affairs. Huge portion of users just did the bare minimum to tick a mental box "I did a thing". If they could find a way to discharge patient from their unit with lowest number of clicks/keypresses they would do that, even if it meant marking the patient as deceased (not much of a hyperbole, by the way). > Nurses are busy doing things like saving lives and caring for people experiencing the worst day of their life. That's the problem with medical personnel. They see the immediate act of "saving lives", e.g. putting a patient in a scanner ASAP, as their only job. All the documentation stuff is usually seen as a hindrance, sometimes as a way to cover someone's ass. Under very rare circumstances it is seen as an integral part of patient care. How do I know that? Every implementation of rule checks would be met with backlash rather than appreciation for an extra pair of robotic eyes.

gregshap 3y ago
This. Same as software engineers doing production support. It's easy to glorify putting out fires and hard to take credit for careful attention that prevents fires. Preventing fires extends a lot more lives.
Propelloni 3y ago
>"user entered shit data and now they are getting shit data out, help" [...] > If they could find a way to discharge patient from their unit with lowest number of clicks/keypresses they would do that, even if it meant marking the patient as deceased (not much of a hyperbole, by the way). That's a classic, not only in hospital IT. Apparently you expect the user to serve the process and not the other way around. That's not how it works. If the goal of the user (or the organisation) is to do as much of X as possible (maybe even incentivized) the process better facilitates that or it will be abused and/or circumvented.
- 3y ago

danielrhodes 3y ago

I see this in a lot of software. Any software person wants to solve a problem, but their solution becomes a part of their own ego such that in their mind it is the cornerstone of the entire business, whether that's true or not. However, the person they're solving it for just wants to get something done - they don't want software in their way. The best software should is as invisible to the end user as possible.