4 ms·

In cases where the consequences for misunderstanding, and one's reactions are much less extreme, but people still let themselves be led into a problem by misund

In cases where the consequences for misunderstanding, and one's reactions are much less extreme, but people still let themselves be led into a problem by misunderstanding, i'd partly blame the technology because it should accommodate the possibility of people paying attention poorly in situations with minor consequences. In this case however, where they decided on murder and the worst kinds of interpretation because of what they'd read, the people are to blame far more than any text problem. They're murderous idiots who couldn't pause to think that maybe trying to kill an ostensible family member shouldn't be done before very, very carefully reading what they had said and later first hearing them out if they want to say something more in person. For that kind of violent stupidity, the stupid itself would have to be fixed if at all possible. No reasonable amount of tech optimization will help because They'll always find something to snag them into deep trouble.

deepsun 2y ago
> blame the technology Reminds me like _any_ work problem can be described as "problem in communication". Problem identified.
- southernplaces7 2y ago
  I would argue that there are problems that go beyond being ones of communication and are instead problems of hard obstinacy. These are much harder to solve except usually by crudely deviating around them. Also, it's sometimes maddening how often society, media, and of course politicians/lawmakers, see extreme cases like the above and try to blame technology with a "do something!" policy solution, even though there will always be extremes of stupid or obstinate that no amount of specific solutions will stop from happening. But, it's easier to blame a tech or UX standard that's controlled by an agent or entity intelligent enough to be subject to pressure. Easier than it is to blame isolated human extremes of behavior that will in any case not respond to calls for change because their nature makes that nearly impossible. Many of the particularly idiotic rules or UX requirements we see in the systems that most of us, being more or less reasonable, interact with come from the above-mentioned misguided attempts to proof that system against the absolute worst, forcing the vast majority who don't need such measures into stumbling over them.

deepsun 2y ago

> blame the technology Reminds me like _any_ work problem can be described as "problem in communication". Problem identified.

southernplaces7 2y ago
I would argue that there are problems that go beyond being ones of communication and are instead problems of hard obstinacy. These are much harder to solve except usually by crudely deviating around them. Also, it's sometimes maddening how often society, media, and of course politicians/lawmakers, see extreme cases like the above and try to blame technology with a "do something!" policy solution, even though there will always be extremes of stupid or obstinate that no amount of specific solutions will stop from happening. But, it's easier to blame a tech or UX standard that's controlled by an agent or entity intelligent enough to be subject to pressure. Easier than it is to blame isolated human extremes of behavior that will in any case not respond to calls for change because their nature makes that nearly impossible. Many of the particularly idiotic rules or UX requirements we see in the systems that most of us, being more or less reasonable, interact with come from the above-mentioned misguided attempts to proof that system against the absolute worst, forcing the vast majority who don't need such measures into stumbling over them.