Does anybody have some ideas on why we as software developers are so likely to shirk our responsibility in the things we create?
Is it a capitalist thing where being paid to do something is all the justification needed, and everything else is “on them” (the people paying you for your work, the people who use the tool/system, the users who choose to interact with the system)?
Is it because our industry is young and so dominated by young people that there isn’t a long term perspective on the impact we have? How often do people ask each other or themselves, “how will I feel about this when I’m looking back over my life and what I’ve brought into the world?”
Is it the nihilistic view that “if we don’t do it, somebody else will, so it might as well be us?”
Is it just the simple fact that doing the right thing (what is in the interest of the people who our software will affect) is harder, takes more work, more discipline, and is not what we’re rewarded for (directly by superiors, or systemically)?
Is it that we all have so little faith in our industry as a whole that we’ve all shrugged and said “fuck it, I’m not going to be the only one who gives a shit”?
Is it the way that user’s are often talked down to and looked down on that effectively minimizes their view, perspectives, and interests?
Do you think it comes from other places?
Is our industry more or less prone to this? We do seem to be a particularly unconcerned and irresponsible group, but there are clearly more egregious examples (finance, pharmaceuticals, the fashion industry, and others). Not that it’s an excuse that others do even worse in some regards.
It’s a hard topic, and I can be prone to cynicism, but I don’t see Silicon Valley moving in the opposite direction any time soon. That said, everything creates its own resistance, and I have seen small trends of choosing sincerity and giving and shit over cynicism and disregard.
Economic forces are definitely a large part of it. Software designed in a world where “usage = value” will end up with UIs that are as difficult to use as possible without actually driving away users. We have gotten so far from a consumer exchanging money for a good or product and the incentives in the modern tech sector are wildly misaligned.
There is also a relative lack of organized forces opposing the actions taken by tech. Think about all of the environmental groups who are trying to prevent pipelines being built, and contrast that with what there is opposing the creation of buggy, user hostile software. A few tech people sounding the alarm is a long way from marching in the streets, being chained to trees, lobbying lawmakers, etc.
Some of this might be the addressed in the future through government regulations (similarly to how other industries have been subjected to environmental or safety regulation), but at the same time, it is difficult to imagine a concise way to make crappy software illegal. And without a lot of public outcry, of course, it is unlikely that anything will be done.
At one point in the article, it states about software applications that “It’s the primary way we communicate our thoughts and feelings to our friends and family.”
Am I the only one who finds this deeply shocking? I am sure not alone who refuses to use software (instant messaging, social media, e-mail, phone, long-distance video calling, online gaming) as a primary way of contact. I’d rather meet with my friends and family in person and have a good time, than communicate indirectly. I still use those tools, of couse, for the logistical part of meeting: agreeing on time and location, or letting them know where I am.
Can people give me examples of why one would use software as a primary means to communicate with ones intimi?
Distance is one reason; many of my friends and family don’t live anywhere near me, since I’ve moved a few times, and I’d like to talk to them more than once or twice a year. This might be more idiosyncratic, but for me, I also find it easier to have personal conversations via methods that are more mediated, especially text chat and email. I find that with people I mainly hang out with in person, the relationship is more like them being acquaintances, while close friends are people I’ve gotten to know at least in part through a lot of textual communication.
18 years ago I started writing some software so I could update my wesite easily because I was planning on taking a contracting job for six months about a thousand miles away (In the end I did not get the job) and I felt this would be an easy way to keep in contact with friends and family while I was away. I still have the blog though.
These days my best friend lives two thousand miles away. Until Niven-style teleportation becomes a reality, how else am I to remain in contact with my best friend (whom I’ve known for almost 40 years now)?
Does anybody have some ideas on why we as software developers are so likely to shirk our responsibility in the things we create?
Is it a capitalist thing where being paid to do something is all the justification needed, and everything else is “on them” (the people paying you for your work, the people who use the tool/system, the users who choose to interact with the system)?
Is it because our industry is young and so dominated by young people that there isn’t a long term perspective on the impact we have? How often do people ask each other or themselves, “how will I feel about this when I’m looking back over my life and what I’ve brought into the world?”
Is it the nihilistic view that “if we don’t do it, somebody else will, so it might as well be us?”
Is it just the simple fact that doing the right thing (what is in the interest of the people who our software will affect) is harder, takes more work, more discipline, and is not what we’re rewarded for (directly by superiors, or systemically)?
Is it that we all have so little faith in our industry as a whole that we’ve all shrugged and said “fuck it, I’m not going to be the only one who gives a shit”?
Is it the way that user’s are often talked down to and looked down on that effectively minimizes their view, perspectives, and interests?
Do you think it comes from other places?
Is our industry more or less prone to this? We do seem to be a particularly unconcerned and irresponsible group, but there are clearly more egregious examples (finance, pharmaceuticals, the fashion industry, and others). Not that it’s an excuse that others do even worse in some regards.
It’s a hard topic, and I can be prone to cynicism, but I don’t see Silicon Valley moving in the opposite direction any time soon. That said, everything creates its own resistance, and I have seen small trends of choosing sincerity and giving and shit over cynicism and disregard.
Thoughts or perspectives?
Economic forces are definitely a large part of it. Software designed in a world where “usage = value” will end up with UIs that are as difficult to use as possible without actually driving away users. We have gotten so far from a consumer exchanging money for a good or product and the incentives in the modern tech sector are wildly misaligned.
There is also a relative lack of organized forces opposing the actions taken by tech. Think about all of the environmental groups who are trying to prevent pipelines being built, and contrast that with what there is opposing the creation of buggy, user hostile software. A few tech people sounding the alarm is a long way from marching in the streets, being chained to trees, lobbying lawmakers, etc.
Some of this might be the addressed in the future through government regulations (similarly to how other industries have been subjected to environmental or safety regulation), but at the same time, it is difficult to imagine a concise way to make crappy software illegal. And without a lot of public outcry, of course, it is unlikely that anything will be done.
It’s not a direct answer, but for more musings on these types of questions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology (you can find the text pretty easily online)
At one point in the article, it states about software applications that “It’s the primary way we communicate our thoughts and feelings to our friends and family.”
Am I the only one who finds this deeply shocking? I am sure not alone who refuses to use software (instant messaging, social media, e-mail, phone, long-distance video calling, online gaming) as a primary way of contact. I’d rather meet with my friends and family in person and have a good time, than communicate indirectly. I still use those tools, of couse, for the logistical part of meeting: agreeing on time and location, or letting them know where I am.
Can people give me examples of why one would use software as a primary means to communicate with ones intimi?
Distance is one reason; many of my friends and family don’t live anywhere near me, since I’ve moved a few times, and I’d like to talk to them more than once or twice a year. This might be more idiosyncratic, but for me, I also find it easier to have personal conversations via methods that are more mediated, especially text chat and email. I find that with people I mainly hang out with in person, the relationship is more like them being acquaintances, while close friends are people I’ve gotten to know at least in part through a lot of textual communication.
18 years ago I started writing some software so I could update my wesite easily because I was planning on taking a contracting job for six months about a thousand miles away (In the end I did not get the job) and I felt this would be an easy way to keep in contact with friends and family while I was away. I still have the blog though.
These days my best friend lives two thousand miles away. Until Niven-style teleportation becomes a reality, how else am I to remain in contact with my best friend (whom I’ve known for almost 40 years now)?
Because flights are much more expensive than XMPP messages