5 ms·

I think the important part of the article was that he was encouraging the simplest solution to interface needs. In this regard I totally agree with him. I thi

by rbellio 14y ago

I think the important part of the article was that he was encouraging the simplest solution to interface needs. In this regard I totally agree with him. I think some of the stuff they've added to consumer products has fallen into a weird modular development space. "Oh, you want us to add a touch responsive display to a refrigerator rather than using mechanical buttons?" Then they throw the kitchen sink at it. Once you've installed that touch screen and the hardware needed to control it, you might as well add the ability to control ice cube production from a mobile app. Since you're already there, you might as well give them the ability to Tweet that they just pulled a slice of double-chocolate cake out of the fridge. Just because these components are capable of acting as small computing devices doesn't mean they should be utilized like one. The entire time I'm reading the article I'm cringing too. I don't want a device that just operates as a universal key for everything I do during my day. I walk up, order a sandwich and they charge my account without any physical transaction happening and no passcode required to open my phone? What's to stop someone else from doing the same thing? A car that opens it doors and starts its engines because I have a phone in my pocket? Same issue. Steal someone's phone and you steal the keys to their life then (really easily).

Espressosaurus 14y ago
I think the author of the article was conflating "interface" with "GUI". Yeah, absolutely. Don't put a GUI as part of my car controls; that's stupid. But the wheel, pedals and shifter are certainly an interface.
- icebraining 14y ago
  But you can eliminate that interface too, with sufficiently advanced driverless cars that know (from e.g. your habits or calendar) where you want to go.
bryanlarsen 14y ago
"What's to stop someone else from doing the same thing?" No different than what happens now. When your wallet gets stolen you call the credit card companies to cancel your cards. Yes, sometimes when you order a sandwich you don't want to pay for it immediately, and sometimes when you get close to your car you don't want it to unlock. But those times are the exceptions. The exceptions are the times that you should deal with a more complex interface. The other 99% of the time it should do the right thing automatically.
- rbellio 14y ago
  There are supposed to be checks in place to stop things like credit card theft from having an immediate affect though. Cashiers should be asking for ID and checking your signature. It's actually a control that is supposed to occur in stores. Someone grabs your phone and gets free meals? What controls are there on that interface? I don't even have a dongle on my keys to unlock my car remotely. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
  - dpark 14y ago
    There are supposed to be checks in place to stop things like credit card theft from having an immediate affect though. > Cashiers should be asking for ID and checking your signature. It's actually a control that is supposed to occur in stores. No, it's not. For small purchases, merchants are not required by the credit card companies to check ID or to even ask for a signature. And for larger purchases, it typically still doesn't happen. My credit card has "ask for photo ID" written on the back instead of a signature. Even with this, I get asked for ID maybe once every two months. Checks that are supposed to happen don't matter. Only checks that actually happen matter. > Someone grabs your phone and gets free meals? What controls are there on that interface? Well, if you're using the system Dorsey was describing, your photo pops up every time you go to pay. So the cashier sees it without asking for it. So if I try to pay with your phone, the cashier can say, "I'm sorry, but you don't look much like rbellio. Should I call my manager over?"
    - rbellio 14y ago
      It's not a credit card company control, it's a merchant control to limit liability. Having worked in loss prevention in the past, I know that the intent is to make sure these controls are checked an maintained. The issue you run into with cashiers is that the turn over rate is usually so high, or those checks aren't done frequently enough that the controls become lax. Why would merchants be so concerned with these controls, you might ask? Because if it can be proven that the charges were made fraudulently, the merchant becomes responsible for them. If someone buys $300 of stuff from a store using your credit card, the store loses that cash.

by rbellio 14y ago

Espressosaurus 14y ago

I think the author of the article was conflating "interface" with "GUI". Yeah, absolutely. Don't put a GUI as part of my car controls; that's stupid. But the wheel, pedals and shifter are certainly an interface.

icebraining 14y ago
But you can eliminate that interface too, with sufficiently advanced driverless cars that know (from e.g. your habits or calendar) where you want to go.

bryanlarsen 14y ago

"What's to stop someone else from doing the same thing?" No different than what happens now. When your wallet gets stolen you call the credit card companies to cancel your cards. Yes, sometimes when you order a sandwich you don't want to pay for it immediately, and sometimes when you get close to your car you don't want it to unlock. But those times are the exceptions. The exceptions are the times that you should deal with a more complex interface. The other 99% of the time it should do the right thing automatically.

rbellio 14y ago
There are supposed to be checks in place to stop things like credit card theft from having an immediate affect though. Cashiers should be asking for ID and checking your signature. It's actually a control that is supposed to occur in stores. Someone grabs your phone and gets free meals? What controls are there on that interface? I don't even have a dongle on my keys to unlock my car remotely. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
- dpark 14y ago
  There are supposed to be checks in place to stop things like credit card theft from having an immediate affect though. > Cashiers should be asking for ID and checking your signature. It's actually a control that is supposed to occur in stores. No, it's not. For small purchases, merchants are not required by the credit card companies to check ID or to even ask for a signature. And for larger purchases, it typically still doesn't happen. My credit card has "ask for photo ID" written on the back instead of a signature. Even with this, I get asked for ID maybe once every two months. Checks that are supposed to happen don't matter. Only checks that actually happen matter. > Someone grabs your phone and gets free meals? What controls are there on that interface? Well, if you're using the system Dorsey was describing, your photo pops up every time you go to pay. So the cashier sees it without asking for it. So if I try to pay with your phone, the cashier can say, "I'm sorry, but you don't look much like rbellio. Should I call my manager over?"
  - rbellio 14y ago
    It's not a credit card company control, it's a merchant control to limit liability. Having worked in loss prevention in the past, I know that the intent is to make sure these controls are checked an maintained. The issue you run into with cashiers is that the turn over rate is usually so high, or those checks aren't done frequently enough that the controls become lax. Why would merchants be so concerned with these controls, you might ask? Because if it can be proven that the charges were made fraudulently, the merchant becomes responsible for them. If someone buys $300 of stuff from a store using your credit card, the store loses that cash.