Re:We should be paying more attention to effort per interact...
by Shenglong on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @12:56PM
(#2755429)
I think this is an interesting train of thought, although I doubt effort will ever go down to zero. After all, we derive pleasure out of many things we do which take effort. I'll often travel to meet a friend for dinner, even though I could've eaten at home, and talked to her over voip and webcam.
I think more so, we're minimizing effort per quality of interaction - or maximizing quality of interaction per effort.
Re:We should be paying more attention to effort per interact...
by username3 on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @01:10PM
(#2755488)
The effort would go below zero when things interact for us and we don't have to think about sending a message or even replying to them anymore. Everyone will know everything and won't care to do anything.
Re:We should be paying more attention to effort per interact...
by pinko on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @01:48PM
(#2755663)
Lower effort per interaction is only a net win if the value of interactions remains constant and the number of interactions doesn't scale up to compensate for the decreased effort.
In short, my experience has been that as communication in general has gotten easier, the average individual communication has gotten more trivial, and the signal/noise ratio has worsened.
Re:We should be paying more attention to effort per interact...
by hammock on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @02:48PM
(#2755936)
That's a hilariously antisocial response (no offense implied). I understand your signal/noise argument, and that seems to me a smaller, tactical issue. On net higher velocity of interaction is a benefit much like globalized trade is a benefit.
edit: here's an analogy closer to home. when a good, wealth-creating startup raises a second round of funds, diminishing marginal returns to capital means the average capital productivity might go down, but the total product (wealth created) tends to go up.
Re:We should be paying more attention to effort per interact...
by orky56 on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @01:26PM
(#2755546)
Product people are always preaching this. Every interaction should be judged based on the return of that investment (the investment being the interaction). If the product improves and can deliver that much better of an experience (matching and exceeding user expectations), then that interaction is worth it. Each interaction should be prioritized according to this ROI and then chosen based on achieving product-market fit (PMF).
I think more so, we're minimizing effort per quality of interaction - or maximizing quality of interaction per effort.
In short, my experience has been that as communication in general has gotten easier, the average individual communication has gotten more trivial, and the signal/noise ratio has worsened.
I'm not at all convinced it's a net win.
edit: here's an analogy closer to home. when a good, wealth-creating startup raises a second round of funds, diminishing marginal returns to capital means the average capital productivity might go down, but the total product (wealth created) tends to go up.