> The interface design has drawn criticism from privacy advocates, as the large black "Accept" button is prominently displayed while the opt-out toggle appears in smaller text beneath. The toggle defaults to "On," meaning users who quickly click "Accept" without reading the details will automatically consent to data training.
Unfortunately, there wasn't a single bottleneck. A bunch of us, not just me, worked our asses off improving performance by a little bit in several places. The compounded improvement IIRC was satisfactory to the customer.
- Without the tutorial, it's confusing that you're not supposed to click and you're supposed to start typing. I wonder if placing the text box at the top would make that more clear.
- Some of the clues are confusing due to inconsistent punctuation. For example:
[to ___fish, to lure someone in using a fake internet persona] = cat
[do this or cut bait] = fish
[taking a pay one is a bummer] = cut
[rocks when added to soda will NOT cause your stomach to explode] = pop
The first line uses a comma, the second line uses "or", the third and fourth lines don't have any punctuation at all, so the sentences make no sense.
> Some of the clues are confusing due to inconsistent punctuation.
> The first line uses a comma, the second line uses "or", the third and fourth lines don't have any punctuation at all, so the sentences make no sense.
... There is no inconsistency there. The 'or' and the comma in lines 1 and 2 are not parallel to each other; they're doing different things. Neither could be replaced by the other without changing the meaning of the clue.
Similarly, in line three, nothing in it could be replaced by a comma or by a disjunction. (But, and I want to emphasize this, line 2 doesn't even contain a disjunction; you appear to have misunderstood all of the clues.)
Line four is a bit different in that it contains a grammatical mistake. It should say [rocks that when added to soda will NOT cause your stomach to explode]. Other than that... it's a fourth style of clue. It isn't comparable to the other three, and there's still no inconsistency.
What do you imagine would add "consistency" to these clues? #s 1, 2, and 4 could be unified like so:
[to ____fish, to lure someone in using a fake internet persona]
[____ or cut bait, common idiom]
[____ rocks, rocks that when added to soda will NOT cause your stomach to explode]
But clue 3 can't be rendered in this style; the closest you can come is [pay ____, taking one of these is a bummer], and the parenthetical isn't really the same as it is for the other three.
Good points. I think clue 3 is weird because what is a "pay one"? You can't take a "pay one", but I get how to read it now---it's like an anaphor for the word. But yes, for consistency a blank space would have worked: [taking a pay ____ is a bummer]
I think my confusion with clue 2 was that I had never heard of the idiom "[to] fish or cut bait" [1]
I think there’s merit in a hybrid approach, and more people should do this instead of slapping a chatbot everywhere, but your approach seems completely backwards from a usability perspective. Chat interfaces (edit: and similarly, CLIs) are at complete odds with discoverability[1]. In your demo, I’m trying to understand the point of the chatbot when all it does is convert a button, with a pretty decent CTA (“try sending us an email”), to a sentence in the first person? Why not a large “Compose Email” button? And if the chatbot can do more than one thing, how many of these potential “conversation starters” are you going to display?
What we need are designers who can help establish a foundational structure (information architecture) that leads to discoverable and simple UIs to nudge users in the right direction. Once users are at a place where they know what’s possible/available, then perhaps you can allow some fuzziness to help them cross the line to accomplish their task.
There's no reason for both the story count and the story summary to be clickable. It's confusing because:
(a) It's not clear what the number in parentheses even means (until you click and infer)
(b) Separate links makes you think they lead to different pages
Also, echoing another comment, it's not really clear what "incoming" and "outgoing" stories mean. Maybe "new" vs. "stale"?