Quotes About Users

For many years, even as users became more sophisticated, personal computers took too much effort to use without problem-solving, keeping alive the yearning for greater simplicity. Microsoft's dominant Windows platform, in particular, was a home for all manner of bugs and problems that required IT people to straighten out.

Hollywood was always best viewed at night. It could only hold its mystique in darkness. In sunlight the curtain comes up and the intrigue is gone, replaced by a sense of hidden danger. It was a place of takers and users, of broken sidewalks and dreams. You build a city in the desert, water it with false hopes and false idols, and eventually this is what happens. The desert reclaims it, turns it arid, leaves it barren. Human tumbleweeds drift across its streets, predators hide in the rocks.

A primary cause of complexity is that software vendors uncritically adopt almost any feature that users want.

There are no significant bugs in our released software that any significant number of users want fixed.

Designers love subtle cues, because subtlety is one of the traits of sophisticated design. But Web users are generally in such a hurry that they routinely miss subtle cues.

The more you watch users carefully and listen to them articulate their intentions, motivations, and thought processes, the more you realize that their individual reactions to Web pages are based on so many variables that attempts to describe users in terms of one-dimensional likes and dislikes are futile and counter-productive. Good design, on the other hand, takes this complexity into account.

Increasingly, companies use their power to influence and manipulate their users. Websites that profit from advertising spend a lot of effort making sure you spend as much time on those sites as possible, optimizing their content for maximum addictiveness.

Google and Facebook don't have "users" or "customers". Instead, they have participants under machine surveillance, whose activities are algorithmically combined within Big Data silos.

Google sells network surveillance and collective intelligence. This is Google's actual, profitable, monetisable product. "Search" is merely Google's front end, a brilliant facade to encourage free interaction by the public. People are not Google's "customers" or even Google's "users", but its feudal livestock.

What we have noticed at YouTube is that many users who have uploaded infringing content are unaware that it's illegal to do so.

YouTube has moved culture forward in attitudes - on refugees, on LGBT issues - especially trans issues. There was untapped demand there; a lot of our users would still be under-served without us. We're a platform that enables everyone to have a voice.

The general reactions were that the video was either not going to load, or be painfully slow to load, or would require a plug-in users didn't have. YouTube changed that, because it just works.

It's very hard to just have a pure form like a Hulu or a YouTube to be successful in China because our view is, users come to a platform; they really don't care whether it is professional or whether it's a user-generated, or it's premium, you see. They want to come to a big database to be able to find the content they want.

By augmenting the pages in the upload process with educational text regarding the type of content that can be uploaded to YouTube, we have seen a sharp overall reduction with users uploading copyrighted materials.

Starting a startup is a process of trial and error. What guided the founders through this process was their empathy for the users. They never lost sight of making things that people would want.

Writing code? That's the easy part. Getting your application in the hands of users, and creating applications that people actually want to use - now that's the hard stuff.

With 100 million people, somebody is using your product in some interesting way. If you change it... you're going to break some use cases.

The best advice for users is to think of the messages they post as having about the same level of privacy as postcards.

As Harris argues, these companies didn't invest the massive resources necessary to perfect this auto-tagging feature because it was somehow crucial to their social network's usefulness. They instead made this investment so they could significantly increase the amount of addictive nuggets of social approval that their apps could deliver to their users.

minimized friction and maximized value to users. Because it costs no more at an organization level to provide services to a customer with $100 or $100 million in assets, DeFi proponents believe that all meaningful financial infrastructure will be replaced by smart contracts, which can provide more value to a larger group of users. Anyone can simply pay the flat fee to use the contract and benefit from the innovations of DeFi.

Platforms can bootstrap their networks by issuing a token with an additional value proposition in the network. Users can keep the token and deploy it in the context of the network or sell it for a profit. Either way, employing tokens in a platform usually increases activity.

The growth rate of the bonding curve is important in determining users' performance. A linear growth rate would generously reward early users if the token grows to a sufficiently large supply.

We will look at two different categories of incentives: (1) staked incentives, which apply to a balance of tokens custodied in a smart contract; and (2) direct incentives, which apply to users within the system who do not have a custodied balance.

Good morning, and I'd like to just answer the question that you're probably thinking. The answer is, yes, we're the team that built the current mobile apps—both of them. We're not proud, and we're just glad users can't rate an app with zero stars.