|
|
|
|
|
|
by jbrennan
4926 days ago
|
|
|
Can you explain why you think it's an inherent flaw in the design? The way I look at it is, yes the software should keep a history of user behaviour and base its actions off that, but there must be feedback involved, either explicit or implicit. This way, if I gave some input to the system once but then never did so again, the likelyhood that one event should affect the future would diminish over time. There could be trickiness around "Bubbles" (like a Search bubble, where it only recommends to you things it thinks you'd like, and never shows you other things). I think those are problematic and should be dealt with. But I don't think that means it's impossible to fix. It's just something that needs to be thought through. I don't have an answer for it right now but that doesn't mean there isn't an answer. |
|
|
Your statement is what I mean. "Thinking things through" should be done during design. Once you have built system, its much harder to compensate for design flaws.
Programming is not designing. Designing is not programming. Fixing bugs is not designing.
You have to design into the UI system a means for it to compensate for changes in user behavior. You don't want a system that takes many uses to train. At the same time you don't want a system that is trained by a single use. For me this is the crux of the problem.
The happy medium that automatically detects deviations from a user's 'normal' behavior _and_ takes the correct action is very hard to design, as it involves AI fuzzy logic.