savolai

Software rarely does. It can only have consequences on either physical machines acting or people acting.

And yet, in addition to emotional skills and general communications education, making sure ux is verified can decrease the odds of such issues.

Heads up protonmail! This would give an edge. Also please allow seeing the note with each message of a thread.

As someone with a human-computer interaction degree, this thread deeply saddens me. In general, human-computer interaction is considered a field of computer science, which I guess hn has a good representatin of.

And yet the discussion here seems to veer off from actual verification of whether toasts actually work, and all the discussion seems to be purely speculation. Granted, there is general argumentation too that's valid to some degree, and it's good to present that, and at the end of the day the only actual data that can guide this decision for a given user interface comes from user testing that is highly context sensitive.

Why? Because there exists no general answer to this question at all. It depends deeply on who your users are, and before the industry understands this basic fact that we as a species are mostly incapable of predicting what different persons from a different user group point of view will be, usability testing will be critically needed, and until we actually start doing it, we will keep creating user interfaces that marginalize everybody but ourselves.

It can indeed be incredibly confusing for users if that is not disclosed, bordering on hostile.

It is a common pattern to reregister i.e. when in a hurry so you end up with multiple ids. If you also have userids in addition to email addresses, it can easily become a hard problem in itself to solve/remember which email/pw corresponds to which userid. Obfuscating user/password error messages can make this much worse.

Techies often forget what a messy world non-engineers live in.

Isn’t NOT disclosing that security by obscurity?

I’d love to have a viewer for this or converter to a standard html single page archive that works in other browsers too. Is there some reason for apple’s proprietary to exist over self contained html? I have a bunch of apple webarchives too (stored from ios to notion) and am worried if there is no durable solution to open these beyond ”code it yourself”.

Here’s a time archive of all the cams https://www.foto-webcam.eu/2024/05/10/2230

On the general theme, I loved the book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_and_Trembling_(film)?wpro...

Things the ios app has this, though I find the UI somewhat confusing.

Love it. Broken on ios tho, for anything longer start doesn’t show.

Anyone hook this up with a GAN yet to keep it peaceful yet make it visual?

Plus translations.

The issue for me is that the popular claim against psychoanalysis seems to be exactly that, binary.

Thanks for bringing nuance and providing quotes!

I’ve personally benefited tremendously from work with the ego structure and from realizing I can strenghen my will/ego capacities and learn to more and more discern and deny excessive power from my superego - from past learnt protective and restrictive impulses that no longer serve a purpose. This understanding alone seems like a treasure trove that keeps on giving year after year while doing introspective work and self inquiry with others interested in the work.

However I have little understanding how this fits in a modern understanding of psychoanalysis or psychodynamic psychotherapy.

What I do know is that CBT I did younger didn’t seem to have nearly sufficient explanatory powers to help me personally. Most of the skills I was offered seemed more or less trivial or perhaps were taught ineffectively.

Another thing that I would have needed was tapping into the resources of my body in the context of therapy and how that links to having capacity to work with myself. CBT seemed obsessed with, umh, overly just cognition.

It appears to me the burden of proof lies on whoever wants to draw the line on what ”real” science is. Only natural sciences, then?

Care to offer evidence of pseudoscience status? All I could find was debunkings of this claim as myth and outdated, and to my understanding research in the field has caught wind in past decades. I’d love to learn more about the debate, so any pointers are welcome.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6020924/

https://cosmonautmag.com/2021/10/on-the-scientific-status-of...

” Depending on where your philosophical allegiances lie, Karl Popper might be a friend or an enemy to whatever version of philosophy of science you accept. Falsificationist approaches to science imply that psychoanalysis makes untestable and unfalsifiable claims! Popper made the very same claims about Marxist social theory as well. There are two issues with this approach. One, if falsificationism is true, then all social sciences, and even some natural sciences, are pseudo-scientific. This is an unacceptable conclusion since much of social science is clearly science. Lots of cutting-edge physics whose models do not lend themselves to controlled experimental testing would also lose their status as science. That is also an absurd conclusion. Newtonian mechanics, for example, would never have been accepted as a theory if we use Popper’s standards of theory corroboration and falsifiability. The theory offered better ways of explaining phenomenon that previous theories were already decent at predicting reliably. The process of legitimizing Newtonian physics had nothing to do with testability.4 A good theory of science does not rule out obvious cases of scientific rigor.5”

It’s data about our users that could fuel design if there was incentive. The system has forgotten about these particular ones.

the measure of society is how it treats the weakest members Thomas Jefferson https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7499429-the-measure-of-soci...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38094970

Why are the needs of gamers more important than those of the elderly, for example?

Please see social constructivist or cognitivist learning theory.

Learning and expression of what is learned are part of the same learning process and it is entirely artificial to separate one of them to be part of learning style, and the other as not being part of it.

Virtually all learning is also learning how to express the subject being learnt.

I do not see how it would not? Appears to me that responding to exams is at once an expression and practice of the learning. It’s not as if a test situation is isolated from the overall learning process.

If a learner is not oriented towards written or read communication, their exam results may not reflect a written test. If a learner has problems with their practical skills being observed in action, a practical test may not reflect their actual skills or understanding.

For doing serious UX work, having direct manipulation of the GUI is paramount. Modeling human cognition without actually seeing the design while designing is makes hard to actually do the core of the work. Qt creator/designer for Qt desktop/widgets shines here.

Designing UIs in text is where most frameworks fail. It seems really bizarre that more techie devs still seem to believe they can design good UI blindfolded.

Imho, C++ not is a language using which user facing software should be built anymore, but Qt at least makes the compromise bearable, making memory management less of a burden.

Oh, alright. Was referring to just the article.

At a quick glance at the actual text, the article doesn’t mention possession but just posting such memes.

+1 Being able to browse with an sqlite ui would be lovely.

Add this as bookmarklet i.e. url contents in bookmark:

javascript:(function(){var style=document.createElement('style');style.type='text/css';style.innerHTML='* { user-select: all !important; }';document.head.appendChild(style);document.body.oncontextmenu=function(){return true;};})();

(Untested)

It would be wonderful if such stories were more prevalent and lauded in the overall industry: at the ens of the day, it's not about specific tech but about how we end up affecting concrete lives. Human-computer interaction as a research field is all about this; seeing the others' perspective. Sadly it's seems to be largely seen as niche activity by the wider community.

It’s also heavily dictated by cultural factors. in northern European countries it’s quite normal to know at least English next to your native language. So much so that in finland tourists seem to think that everybody knows English and foreigners who try to learn finnish, tend to complain that Finns switch to English at every opportunity.

Thanks for speaking up. I love how well you elaborate the reality of trauma and life choices.

I needed reminding too.

"In a "switched" network, when Device A wants to send data to Device B, the switch directly connects these two devices so they can chat. Think of it like a train switcher that directly links Track A to Track B for a specific train, instead of sending it through a maze of tracks where other trains are moving.

In contrast, a "hub-based" network is like a party line in old telephone systems. When Device A talks, EVERY device hears it, but only Device B cares and listens. This is less efficient and can be slower because all devices get the data, which clogs up the network.

Another option is a "routed" network, where a router decides the best path for the data. This is like GPS choosing the best route based on current traffic conditions. It's more flexible but can introduce more delays because the data might go through multiple steps to reach its destination.

It's called "switched" because the switch acts like a railroad switch operator, making a direct track connection from one device to another for each piece of data. It "switches" the pathway specifically for that data to make the communication as direct as possible."

I like the minimalist design. You might want to more clearly make a visual distinction between buttons and headings in the app, now it's somewhat confusing to know where to click.

Hi pavlov, here's a reaction :)

I suppose the background learning required starts here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interaction_nets

Gave me sth like 65 eur or $ annual license after giving my email.

Not sure how being able to reason about good behaviour in an effective manner that's collectively beneficial isn't in the domain of intelligence.

We have moral philosophy as an academic discipline, after all.

Human brains develop in interrelation. Much, if not all of our intelligence gets developed in relation to other humans and beings.