Gregory's Server@leftylabourtech Agreed. This one upsets me the most. It's so distressing to see someone who's older or ill or cognitively challenged struggling with some badly-designed digital solution that they're forced to use if they want, for example, to see their prescriptions or a letter from the council. And getting help from others adds further upset for them because it often involves personal information, and they feel 'reduced' to being treated like children.
|
6 comments
@iamdavidobrien @leftylabourtech The added layer of enshittification here, I think, is the fact that once the poor solution has been introduced, the customer or patient can't access the service or information in other ways. If you do manage to contact a human for help, they just keep telling you that you have to use the app or website. Even in situations where you've shown them why it's not technically possible because of a missing feature or an error.  Yip. And that's an absence of design. There should *always* be an offline way to achieve the same outcome. I'm a service designer. This is literally the job. Make the service available to everyone. I am not arguing your point about #enshittification But design is not the problem; capitalism is the problem. @iamdavidobrien "There should *always* be an offline way to achieve the same outcome." Very agreed! And yes, absence of design is core. @iamdavidobrien @CiaraNi That's certainly the case to a great degree. Service is a "cost centre" for capitalism. If we are all tied up in various forms of electronic communications and never get to a human, the "service" does not need to be provided and money saved. |
That's not bad design. That's an absence of design. It's people just doing stuff because they can, without any user research whatsoever.
@CiaraNi @leftylabourtech