|
|
|
|
|
|
by oh_sigh
4878 days ago
|
|
|
> I don't know about your simulation, but over here in the real world it doesn't work that way. Wow, great point. You're obviously unbiased! You don't even know the details of the simulation, but you're confident that you really know what's up based on your presence in "the real world". > Many people don't dry their hands at all in a public bath room Yes, but they still wash their hands. Many people don't dry their hands because they have to use the hot air blowers, which they know are ineffective. If they see an effective device, some members of that group will choose to use it instead of jazz handing. But even discounting those people, the wash + dry combination still works out better for most cases I can devise. The only universe I have come up with where wash and then dry else where is better than washing and drying at the same station is if there are an equal number of paper towel dispensers as there are to sinks, which has never happened in a bathroom where the number of sinks > 2, as far as I know. > By combining faucet and dryer you force these people into the same bottleneck as the hand-dryer users. I wasn't arguing for optimizing any one special interest groups time spent in the bathroom, I was optimizing for the total network throughput of the bathroom. |
|
|
But you didn't. You have serialized access to two resources that were previously independent.
Since a significant portion of users need only one of the two resources you have created a new point of contention. For access to the faucet not only do I have to wait for people washing their hands, now I also have to wait for people drying their hands.