Scott Adams' Blog

When Ideas Become Gold

Posted September 3rd, 2012 @ 1:57pm in #General Nonsense

Someday you’ll be able to write software by talking. Sit in front of your computer and simply describe your requirements: “I want an app that lets me organize hiking trips. There should be a sign-up page, a map of hiking places, a calendar of events …” Just keep describing your requirements while the site takes shape right in front of your eyes. If you forget to include something, your computer will helpfully suggest features borrowed from similar websites on the Internet.

Maybe the future of software won’t be quite that simple. But I do think that creating apps and websites will someday be no harder than building a PowerPoint presentation or using Excel. It’s heading that way.

Creating a new business might someday be that simple too. Today, starting a business is the most annoyingly inconvenient process in the world. You need lawyers and accountants and contracts. It’s complicated stuff. But I can imagine someday all of that becoming easy. Simply tell your computer you want to start a business and it will ask you a few questions then set up your corporation or partnership for you. It will outsource your logo design, set up your bank accounts, and have you ready for business in a few days. You might have to incorporate in the Cayman Islands to get that level of simplicity, but that’s okay too.

In today’s world, ideas are free and plentiful while implementation is the hard part. You and I can brainstorm ten new business ideas in ten minutes. The hard part would be implementing them. I think today’s situation will someday be the reverse. Implementation will be easy and all of the obvious Internet business ideas will be used up.

I’m not suggesting there will be no new inventions. Technology will keep moving forward. But business ideas for the Internet will be exhausted. For example, once you have an eBay, the category of “online auction site” is pretty much filled, give or take a few variations on the theme. Once Facebook exists, the world doesn’t really need a second social network.

Someday it will be a rare and amazing thing if anyone comes up with a new Internet business idea. Thanks to technology, starting a business in the future won’t require hard work, deep pockets, or a good network of contacts. Implementation will be easy. But a truly unique idea will be worth a billion dollars.

We’re already seeing the start of an idea bubble with patents. My understanding is that a new patent with no immediate application can be sold to investors (speculators?) for up to $20,000. Some of these patents are used by big companies to defend against patent claims. Some patents are bought with the intention of resale. Whatever the reason, the market for “ideas” has never been this active.

I’m in the process of filing a patent now. I’ve been through the patent process several times with other ideas. I’m motivated in part by the thought that the gold of the future will be ideas. I might be better off owning the rights to an idea than owning stock in an actual company.

My question of the day is this: Do you think the value of ideas (patented or otherwise) will increase, decrease, or stay the same in the future?

0 Comments

Quantifying Gullibility

Posted August 30th, 2012 @ 2:36pm in #General Nonsense

We live in an age that might someday be seen as the most absurd in human history. On one hand, every educated person knows that the physical structure of the human brain controls what people think and do. At the same time, the vast majority of humans also believe brains are part magic. We give names to the magic part of our brain such as mind, soul, spirit, and free will. The most common view that educated people hold about the brain is that its physical structures give us some tendencies and biases but we can use the magic part - the “mind” - to override all of that.

Recently scientists have discovered the area in your brain that controls your gullibility. It’s the ventromedial area of the prefrontal cortex. When it’s underdeveloped, as in kids, or degraded as in the elderly, the result is more gullibility.

Now we know which part of the brain makes people think they are part meat and part magic. If the ventromedial area of the prefrontal cortex is suboptimal, you’ll believe in horoscopes, ghosts, devils, conspiracy theories, and whatever your favorite politician is saying.

I’m guessing we’re already at or near the point at which scientists can measure a normal adult’s level of gullibility. I’m sure there’s some way to devise gullibility tests in the lab. And it looks as if we might someday be able to do a brain scan and see how active the ventromedial area of the prefrontal cortex is while a subject is contemplating certain hard-to-believe topics. Imagine how our ability to quantify gullibility could affect politics.

How long will it be before pollsters can show their results filtered by gullibility? I’d like to see the opinions of the gullible compared to the opinions of the people who have robust and fully functioning prefrontal cortexes. Even better, the first filter would test for knowledge on a topic, a second filter would test for general intelligence, and a third would test for gullibility. I’d only care about the opinions of people who passed all three filters.

Interestingly, a person can be brilliant and well-informed but gullible at the same time because the brain uses different zones for different functions. I’d like to know who my brilliant-but-gullible fellow citizens are because those folks are a menace to society. The brilliant part makes them highly capable while the gullible part makes them dangerous. The ones who don’t become serial killers are voting. In terms of body count, which is worse?

0 Comments

Unethical Behavior

Posted August 29th, 2012 @ 1:47pm in #General Nonsense

Bribery is illegal, but is it unethical?

Most of you would say yes. You probably reflexively imagined a situation in which most people are honest and only a few cheaters are doing the bribing. But suppose I say I’m talking about the country of Elbonia where bribery is so normal and expected that the government publishes helpful bribery guidelines. In the case of Elbonia, is bribery unethical? Some of you probably say no. Context matters. If literally everyone is doing it, it’s just how the system works. In its own way it’s completely honest and transparent. You might even rename bribery to “tipping.”

Now let’s apply the same reasoning to fake product reviews online. Suppose I ask you if paying for fake positive reviews online is unethical. Most of you would say it is. Here again you reflexively assume most reviews are honest and only a few weasels are behind the fake ones.

But what if most reviews online - both good and bad - were fakes, but the public didn’t generally know it? In that environment, would it be unethical to add a few fake positive reviews of your own? Let’s say the fake positive reviews that you add are honest in the sense that your product is genuinely good. You would be improving the quality of information for consumers. You might argue that letting the misleading reviews stand would be the bigger crime. You’re on the side of the angels, who just happen to be on your side economically.

I don’t know how many products have fake online reviews. But over time I would expect the number to increase steadily toward 100%. I use music pirating as my model for that prediction.

My assumption is that nearly every teen who listens to a lot of music has done some pirating. The crime is simple to commit, has an immediate payoff, an ambiguous victim, and virtually zero chance of punishment. When you have those four conditions, nearly everyone becomes a criminal.

Now suppose you have a product or business that is reviewed online. You know from experience that your competitors will leave some fake bad reviews of your product, and those fake reviews are a disservice to your potential customers. Do you have an ethical obligation to balance out the fake bad reviews with your own good ones?

The problem of fake bad reviews is especially troubling for anyone who dabbles in more than one line of business. If a politician writes a spy novel in her spare time, you can expect people from the opposing political party to write fake reviews panning the book. Online reviews are a convenient way to punish strangers with impunity.

Fake reviews were a major factor when I was deciding whether to write a new book. Online reviews for my work generally bring out the nuts that have convinced themselves I’m a holocaust-denying creationist who believes psychics are magic and “excuses” rape. It sounds funny when I lump all four rumors in the same sentence, but I’ve literally had to deal with each of them. It’s an occupational hazard.

Now add on top of that my stalker who is sure I sometimes travel to Canada and rifle through her belongings before copying her computer files and having my way with the family dog. She likes to call my business associates and inform them of my many crimes and misdeeds. I wouldn’t expect a good book review from her.

Now add the angry customer who ate at a local restaurant I once owned. He doesn’t know the restaurant changed ownership two years ago and he’s mad about the slow service he got on that busy Saturday last month. I wouldn’t expect a good book review from that guy.

The interesting question is not whether fake reviews exist - because that much we know - but where the breaking point is. I would think 10% fake reviews would be tolerable and the system would still be useful to consumers. But does credibility collapse when we reach an average of 20% fake reviews? How about 30%?

I think the breaking point for online reviews is when fakes reach 20% or so. We’re probably above that level for local businesses and approaching it for national products.

0 Comments

Rewarding Work

Posted August 27th, 2012 @ 1:51pm in #General Nonsense

[Updated with link to the graph I referenced. Thanks to the folks who found it.]

The other day I saw a very cool graph that showed which vitamins and supplements have good science behind them and which ones don’t. The graphic was interesting on several levels. The first thing I noticed was how cleverly constructed it was. I could see at a glance which vitamins and supplements are supported by science. The graph was interesting enough to keep me staring at it, following its little lines and connections as if searching for Waldo. That level of engagement probably helped me retain more information than if I had skimmed it.

The next thing I realized is what a good public service this graph was. Millions of people would see it and come away with knowledge that directly applies to their own health. Some people might start taking useful supplements and vitamins and others might discontinue the ones that science doesn’t support. There’s a good chance that the creator of the clever graphic saved some lives. How many of you have a job that rewarding?

I was wondering about the artist who made the graph. Did he or she get this assignment and think I can save some lives? Or was it just another assignment and just another paycheck? People who are primarily working for money can do good work, but the cleverness of this particular graph suggests there was a stronger motivation behind it. I think the creator was aware of the stakes and elevated his or her game through intrinsic motivation.

Whenever you see the x-factor in someone’s output - that little extra something that turns the good into the awesome - it’s a marker for intrinsic motivation. Monetary motivation plateaus at the point you think your work equals your pay. For most people, that happens when the product is good but not awesome. To get to awesome you need to think you might be changing the world, saving lives, redeeming your reputation, attracting the mate of your dreams, or something else that is emotionally large.

One of my techniques for staying motivated is that I put everything I do in the context of how it might improve the entire world, or at least some subset of it. With Dilbert I imagine that at least some of my output makes people laugh, or smirk, or feel less alone in their misery. Laughter decreases stress, which improves health and increases both productivity and creativity. In a very small way I’m nudging the world in a positive direction. That thought helps me dig deeper to find the x-factor for tomorrow’s comic.

Then there’s this blog. I don’t expect anything I write here to directly influence world events or to change anyone’s mind about anything. But what I know from my work as a creator of content is that all creativity comes from putting existing ideas into a mixing bowl then swirling the whole mess around to see what happens. The more ideas you are exposed to, the more likely one of your mixtures will produce something great. If you read any idea in this blog that you wouldn’t have thought on your own, your creative potential is increased. That’s a big deal because nothing of importance has ever been done without creativity. I’m motivated by the thought that I’m contributing to civilization’s creative pool.

This brings me to your job, whatever that might be. Is there any opportunity - no matter how small - for you to change the world through your work?

Leave me a comment and tell me what you’re doing that could change the world, no matter now slightly, in a positive direction.

0 Comments

Emergency Backup Leader (EBL)

Posted August 22nd, 2012 @ 2:36pm in #General Nonsense

I wonder how near the United States is to a revolution. No one ever sees revolutions coming. They just happen. It’s like spontaneous combustion. One day people are merely disgruntled and the next they are gathering in the streets. I see several ways a revolution could happen in the United States in the near future.

I have a bet with a Republican friend about the outcome of the Presidential election. He predicts that Romney will win the election and President Obama will find a legal pretense to stay in office, effectively becoming a Putin-like dictator.

Is that impossible? All it would take is for the exit polls to show Romney winning while the official vote count goes President Obama’s way. That would create a plausible-enough conspiracy theory to mobilize the well-armed segment of the population. It won’t matter if the cause of the discrepancy is that the exit polls are wrong, or perhaps only the FOX News exit polls are wrong. Half of the population will believe something fishy happened with the vote tabulation. The streets will be filled with gun-toting conservatives demanding the President’s resignation. That could happen.

Another way that President Obama could lose the election and retain power is if the country is in an unprecedented military or economic crisis at the end of this year and a leadership transition would be a mortal risk. I could see that happening if banks collapse, there’s a huge natural disaster, or a war with Iran escalates out of control. That could happen.

Another risk of revolution is that Romney gets elected and stacks the Supreme Court with conservatives who subsequently rule abortion to be unconstitutional. That would trigger a revolt the next day. That could happen.

Another path to revolution - and the one I think most likely - is that the approval rating for Congress will sink so low that confidence in the system will simply drift below the minimum level necessary for a republic to function. That could happen if the budget problems aren’t solved and our economic hole becomes bottomless. If a quarter of the population stopped filing federal income taxes out of principle, the toxic effect would make the government collapse like a fat man with clogged arteries. There wouldn’t be enough jail cells for all of the conscientious objectors. That could happen.

A straight-forward economic meltdown could bring down the government. Liberals would blame the government for spending all the money on wars while under-taxing the rich. Conservatives would blame the government for giving away all of their hard-earned money to the lazy poor. If the financial system breaks down entirely, and both Republicans and Democrats see it as the government’s fault, citizens will take to the streets. That could happen.

The most boring scenario for revolution is that the federal government becomes so bloated, useless, and constipated that it simply ceases to do anything, good or bad. No laws are passed, no judges are ratified, and no budgets are approved. Everything just stops. In that scenario the government would be committing a sort of Congress-assisted suicide. Citizens would just wake up one day and realize their government had evolved from ineffective to non-existent. That could happen.

There’s also the “spark” scenario for revolution. That happens when some high-profile injustice is in the headlines and the public starts seeing it as a symbol of the government’s larger evil. That could happen.

Given all of the risks of revolution, it would be prudent to designate an Emergency Backup Leader (EBL). If the country gets to the point where its elected leaders are deposed, ignored, or thoroughly discredited, we need a charismatic figure to step in and keep some sort of order until the system is repaired. I hereby nominate myself for EBL.

I’m under no illusion that I’d be a good leader. I’m sure you’d agree on that point. But the thing that matters most in a crisis is not so much the talent of the leader as the fact that one exists at all. The first step in reclaiming order out of chaos is to know who is in charge. If no one else volunteers for the job - which seems likely - I’m all you have.

I’m assuming that if all Hell breaks loose and the country is falling apart, there might be failures in our communications systems. The country won’t have the time or the capacity to find a more capable temporary leader than me. I’ll be the default choice simply because no one else volunteered and the country would be too fractious and disorganized to come up with someone more acceptable.

I do have a few advantages as an Emergency Backup Leader. For starters, I’m neither a liberal nor a conservative; I go where the data leads me, with a bias for what has worked in the past. I’m pro-religion, because the data says it makes people happy and healthy, but I’m not a believer, so I won’t be discriminating against your faith. One big risk in a crisis is that a crazy religious leader emerges. That wouldn’t be me.

On day one of my emergency leadership I will suspend all laws regarding drugs, prostitution, and gun ownership. I’d make it legal for anyone to operate a business without a permit. In a financial crisis the public will need to make money any way it can, and defend itself any way it needs to. Law enforcement will be busy enough without chasing the small stuff. Once the economy is restored we can have adult conversations about what needs to be regulated.

If the federal government falls apart, state governments are likely to be intact. As your future and potential EBL I pre-authorize governors in each state to ignore any federal laws and run things as if they are their own kingdoms at least until the federal government becomes functional.

I also pre-authorize the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to make his own military decisions until an elected civilian leader is back in charge. That should keep the Canadians from launching a sneak attack.

I haven’t worked out the rest of my emergency leadership plan yet, so if you have any suggestions, leave them in the comments. Assume that in a crisis situation there won’t be effective communication within the country, either for technical reasons or because there is too much “noise” in the political atmosphere. So your suggestions should be the sort where people know in advance what the drill is, the same way that occupants of a building learn where the emergency exits are before the emergency.

Suggestions?

0 Comments

Car Buying

Posted August 20th, 2012 @ 2:35pm in #General Nonsense

This weekend my wife and I went shopping to replace our beloved minivan. Negotiating car prices is a fascinating experience. I’m not good at negotiating because I’ve never taken acting classes. I find it hard to get into character. When the salesman asked me how much I wanted to spend on our chosen vehicle, I only had one response ready: “I’d like to spend zero, you boiled turd. Just give it to me. Or did I misunderstand the question?”

Okay, I didn’t say that. But I did laugh at him in a mocking sort of way. Obviously the question is designed to determine how dumb the customer is. You pass the test by not taking out a copy of your bank statement and saying, “I can’t read. Can you tell me how much money I have?” The sales guy bowed out of the negotiations and introduced us to the General Manager. The GM went into his ridiculous spiel about how he was willing to sell this vehicle for less than he paid because he wants the manufacturer to give him a higher quota of that model next month. Apparently his business plan involves having a greater inventory of cars that no one is willing to buy for more than his costs. The general manager looked me in the eye to see if I believed his absurd lie. My wife and I just glanced at each other with mock disappointment. The game was on.

It was time to get into character. I played the part of the husband who insists on doing endless research, thus providing the dealership with no hope of closing the sale today. I said, “I want to spend some time doing research and then I can give you an offer. Maybe I can get that done by tomorrow.”

Sales people hate two things: Informed customers and postponement. This was the worst case scenario for the dealership, and my ploy was designed to make the general manager “negotiate with himself,” as the saying goes. In other words, we wanted him to keep offering lower prices before we made our first offer. That brings down the ceiling price and prevents us from accidentally offering more than he would have asked for.

Then the general manager goes into his canned routine about some sort of dealer incentive or other ambiguous pot of money that he could reluctantly dip into, thus offering an even lower price. He said that if we accepted this offer his children would have to wear clothes made of plastic grocery bags or some damned thing. I wasn’t paying attention to the details.

We acted unhappy and asked for his business card. “We’ll do some research and get back to you,” we said.

Later that evening, an hour before the dealership closed, Shelly sent a text to the general manager offering a glimmer of hope. Shelly took on the part of the “good cop.” Her character wanted the car but she needed a way to convince her stubborn husband to stop researching. She told the general manager by text that she needed another $1,000 off the price he offered to make that happen. He offered half of that. We accepted.

Before we made our offer I did my research only to discover that there was no way to figure out a fair price for this particular vehicle. There are plenty of sites that seem to offer that sort of information, but not credibly, and usually not for this model. I assume the car-buying sites are in the pockets of the car dealers or have their own scams going. In the end, we were flying blind and probably got screwed on the price. But that leads me to my favorite part of the negotiating process. No, we weren’t done yet. Once you have an agreed price, the dealer keeps negotiating, but more cleverly this time.

The next step in the negotiations - if you can call it that - involves a fill-in sales guy making a “mistake” that lists the price on our paperwork far higher than what we agreed. By the time you get to this stage of the process, you’re worn out from looking at all of the numbers, and you’re tempted to sign whatever they slide in front of you. But I’ve been through this process enough times to know that the first version is always the “mistake” paperwork. I asked to see what price he had on his forms before he went too far, showed it to my wife, and explained to her the “mistake” price ploy. The sales guy apologized for the “mistake” and corrected it.

The sales guy introduced us to the finance guy for the rest of the paperwork. This is the final phase of our negotiations. The finance guy goes into his transparently phony act of amazement that we convinced the general manager to give us such a good price. He acts as if the price is so low it might be a mistake, or some kind of once-every-hundred-years situation. This is total bullshit, of course, and every finance guy at every dealership says the same thing to every buyer. But it still feels good, which makes me feel dirty.

The finance guy goes into his sales pitch about how we need some sort of invisible coating of magic protection for the exterior of the car. Without that protection a midsized bird can shit right through the hood and halfway through the engine block. We also need some invisible chemicals to protect the interior of the car because otherwise we are just wasting our money. Oh, and we need a more comprehensive warranty to cover all of the many, many things that will be breaking on this car. Apparently we had negotiated a terrific price on a car that was highly vulnerable to the elements. I kept craning my neck to see if it had dissolved into the parking lot behind me. All of the invisible and magical products he offered totaled several thousand dollars.

I declined all offers, but the finance guy wasn’t done. He poured water on a sample of floor upholstery that had allegedly been coated with magic protectant. The water beaded and rolled like a marble. It was cool. But I turned it down.

As I assess our performance in this process, I want to believe we got a good price and that we cleverly declined offers for useless add-ons. The reality is that we are amateurs and we were dealing with professionals. The rational part of me knows that somewhere there are customers getting better prices on this same vehicle, which causes me to hate both the car and the dealership. And thanks to the finance guy, I have to worry that my car has no magic protection. I’ve afraid to exhale in its general direction.

Today we will take the car back to the dealer to find out why it is leaking so badly. It might be water from the AC, but it’s a non-stop stream. I just hope we don’t run into the finance guy at the dealership. I don’t want to hear how the magic protection would have stopped this leak.

0 Comments

Creativity and Memory

Posted August 17th, 2012 @ 2:22pm in #General Nonsense

I have an astonishingly bad memory. On the plus side, I’m more creative than most civilians. I think the two are connected. That’s my hypothesis for today.

I’m good at remembering concepts, systems, ideas, and generally how things flow and fit together. But I don’t have a trace of photographic memory in which one can remember exact conversations, phone numbers, names, and other matters of objective fact. I also can’t remember directions to a new place until I’ve been there a hundred times. It’s inconvenient as hell.

In school, I could force myself to remember topics for tests, but it only lasted as long as the test. At home, we have a lot of conversations about what I might have heard or said at some specified time in the past and it almost never sounds vaguely familiar. Sometimes it feels as if someone else lived my life until this very moment and now I’m taking over.

The way I perceive the act of creativity while it happens in me is as a process of forgetting, not a process of creating. The mind is not capable of having zero thoughts, so when you flush whatever is in your head at the moment it creates a sort of vacuum that sucks in a new thought. In my case, that process of forgetting and then sucking in a new thought happens continuously. My memory isn’t “sticky,” so what comes in slides right back out in a nanosecond. Sometimes a new thought is worth writing down, which I either do right away or lose it forever. Usually the new idea is random garbage and it passes quickly, making room for the next idea. My mind feels like a slot machine that I can’t stop pulling. Sometimes the diamonds line up, but not often.

My question for readers is this: Do any of you have a combination of excellent memory for facts/dialog/numbers while also possessing commercial grade creativity? My hypothesis is that none of you will have that combination.

0 Comments

Predicting War

Posted August 15th, 2012 @ 2:42pm in #General Nonsense

Israel and Iran continue their war of words. Pundits are trying to predict when and if the missiles will start flying. I wonder how much money can be made by investors who correctly guess the timing of a first strike. I assume the first signs of war-sized violence will send Israeli stocks down and perhaps defense stocks in the United States up.

And this made me wonder how hard it must be for Israel to keep the timing of a first strike secret. There must be some small but definite difference between being generally ready to attack and actually making the decision. I’m guessing some types of military contracts with civilian companies get activated just ahead of an attack. Maybe the military suddenly purchases more of some sorts of supplies that can’t be easily stored. Or maybe the families of top Israeli officials cut short their travel and vacation plans. It seems to me that it would be impossible to hide the timing of a first attack from all insiders who might use the knowledge to profit.

A few days ago I noticed a 5% drop in an Israeli ETF that I invested in. A quick check of the news didn’t turn up any stories beyond the usual drumbeats for war that have been ongoing for months. Is a sudden 5% drop a sign that insiders know what’s coming?

Then I asked myself if Israel is clever enough do some head fakes (phony leaks) ahead of the real attacks just to see how Iranian defenses respond. It seems like a good way to make the Iranian leadership imagine more vividly how they will feel when the real thing happens. Maybe that’s a good negotiating tactic. And maybe it helps make the real attack more of a surprise.

Israel is in an oddly impossible position. They say they can’t tolerate an Iranian nation that talks openly of Israel’s annihilation while it’s working toward the capability of building nukes. But an Israeli military attack would guarantee that the Iranians become more dangerous now and later. Israel loses no matter what.

If your only two options (attack or don’t attack) are both losing propositions, what do you do? My guess is that a third option will emerge that would have been unthinkable under conditions less dire. Maybe the third option will involve a bold peace initiative the likes of which no one would have seen coming. Maybe the third option is a decapitation strike against the Iranian regime instead of an attack on nukes. Or maybe Israel will dig up the top layer of the Holy Lands, put it on barge-islands, build settlements on top of it, and float away. (It only sounds ridiculous until you compare it to the alternative of presumed nuclear annihilation.)

I put the question to you: Will Israel attack Iran’s nuclear sites?

0 Comments

DOS-like Interface for Smartphones

Posted August 13th, 2012 @ 1:55pm in #General Nonsense

Are you old enough to remember the DOS operating system? Users had to enter commands in text form. It seems so primitive now. But I predict a return to text interfaces, this time on your smartphone.

I love my smartphone but I find it annoying to hunt for the right app icon to do a simple task such as send a message or make a note to myself. I want a Smartphone with a Preloader interface, a term I just invented. It’s a blank box and keyboard for data entry that is always your first screen. Instead of first specifying which application you want to use, such as messaging, email, phone, etc., you simply use a simple text code and start working. For example, if you want to send an email to Bob, you type into the empty box:
—————————————————————-
e bob about borrowed lawnmower

Hi Bob,

Please return my lawnmower. Have a nice day.

Scott
—————————————————————–
Your smartphone would recognize “e bob” to be a shortcut for “email the guy named Bob in my address book.” The subject line would be whatever followed “about” on the same line.

When you’re done typing your message, click “submit” and it brings up your email app populated with your message and Bob’s email address, or options for selecting which Bob you want. If everything looks good, you press Send.

The main idea here is that you should be able to start doing your work before you choose the app. The content of the message will tell your smartphone which app you intend.

Some one-letter text commands for the preloader might include:

E = email

T= text

N = note

C = calendar

W = weather

P = phone

V = voicemail

If you want to enter an appointment in your calendar, just type “c staff meeting 9am Tuesday Aug 26 alert 1 hour”. Your calendar app will pop up and you can confirm it entered the appointment correctly.

Do you want the hourly weather forecast for Baltimore? Just type “w Baltimore hour” into your preloader. It’s much faster than opening the app first, looking for the box to enter the city then clicking the hourly option.

The way my brain is wired I always want to jump right into a task before I hunt for an app. I often accidently choose my text messaging icon instead of email, cancel the texting app, open email, choose the addressee box, type addressee, choose subject, and so on. The process feels inefficient and it bugs me every time. I want to start working immediately, while a thought is fresh in my mind. Only after I have done my work do I want the phone to deduce which app I intended.

Voice recognition apps already do this sort of thing. But 80% of the time that I use my phone I’m someplace where speaking aloud would be awkward or unwise. I want a text interface to speed things up.

Does that already exist?

0 Comments

The Problem with Shopping

Posted August 8th, 2012 @ 2:59pm in #General Nonsense

Recently I went to Best Buy to purchase a laptop. That’s the sort of product I would normally research and buy online, but I had planned poorly and needed the laptop for a trip the next day. A cheerful Best Buy employee helped me narrow my choice to what was clearly the best laptop they carry. It was light, fast, and had a quick boot time. I asked many questions and made my decision. This awesome marvel of modern technology was the machine for me. I liked it so much that the second-best choice sitting sadly next to this triumph of engineering looked like yesterday’s bloated trash. I was feeling good about my decision.

A few minutes later the Best Buy employee emerged from the back room to tell me the model I chose wasn’t in stock, and none of the nearby stores had one either. My only choice was the piece of crap laptop that I had mentally relegated to a distant and pathetic second place. I couldn’t do it. I left the store.

I drove straight to Office Depot to repeat the process. I asked the cranky Office Depot employee who worked in the computer area which model best fit the criteria I laid out. He pointed to a display model and explained with a confidence bordering on arrogance that this was the machine for me. The price list next to it showed three different models with different features and prices. I asked which price applied. He waived his hand at the sign and mumbled something ambiguous. I had to ask five more times to get him to actually place his finger upon the correct price and clearly state that this was the right one. That’s when things turned ugly.

I looked at the model on the price he pointed to and asked where on the actual laptop I could verify that model number. The arrogant sales guy explained that he had worked in this department every day for the past eight months. He explained that if he tells me the laptop is a certain model, it is. End of story.

“But where does it say that on the laptop?” I asked several more times. One of his coworkers came by to ask him a question and he told her that I don’t trust him. The situation was starting to get tense so I tried to lighten the mood by saying to his coworker in a jocular tone “We just met.” My witticism was met with a scowl.

The cranky Office Depot sales guy booted the laptop and went into the Windows menus to show me the model number and get me off his back. At this point he was clearly annoyed. “There it is,” he said bruskly, pointing to the screen with the model number.

“Where’s that model number on the price list?” I asked.

The sales guy started talking in a slightly slower than normal way as if explaining something to a moron. He pointed to the model number on the screen and waved his hand at the price list. “It’s the middle one, like I said.”

Except it wasn’t. The laptop model displayed in Windows didn’t match any of the models on the price sheet. It wasn’t even close. I had to describe the discrepancy to him several times before he was willing to look closely enough to verify it. Awkward. In the end, he admitted he didn’t know which laptop he had vigorously recommended to me and didn’t even have a way to know how much it would cost. “How long did you say you’ve worked here?” I asked. That didn’t help. I left without a computer.

I had one local computer outlet left. I went to Office Max and was greeted by a bearded geek who actually knew what he was talking about. He listened to my criteria and took me directly to the best choice for me. That model was out of stock, of course, but he warned me of that in advance, so I was okay with it. He was willing to sell me the demo unit for a discount if I didn’t mind that the battery life had probably degraded after a few months on display. So I bought his semi-defective laptop because three retail stores into my journey I didn’t have a better option for a same-day purchase.

Later that day I went to my local mall to look for some t-shirts. If you haven’t been to a retail clothing store recently, let me tell you what you will find. First, you have your hideous clothing choices that no one will ever buy. That’s 75% of every store. Then you have the 25% that look good and won’t make you look like a sandwich board advertisement for the brand. Within that subset of shirts you will find sizes small and XXL. Nothing else. And we’re done.

I don’t have much better luck shopping online. At least half of my online purchase attempts are met with an out-of-stock message, defective online store technology that freezes, endless bother about entering codes and passwords, and a nagging feeling in my gut that the positive online reviews are bogus.

All of this makes me wonder how much more I would be willing to shop, and thereby stimulate the economy, if the process weren’t so frustrating and painful. My guess is 20% more.

How about you? Do you buy less because the process of shopping is annoying, or do you end up buying the same amount but it takes longer and you’re less happy doing it?

[Note: Yes, I know I would have had a better retail experience at the Apple store. But I’ve owned several Apple computers over the years and every one was an overpriced crash-lemon. Apple can only fool me six or seven times in a row. Now I just buy their stock.]

0 Comments