Monday, May 01, 2017
Efficient?
This article pointed by RCS looked potentially interesting:
I clicked on it and started waiting. The waiting got longer and longer, so I decided to start again with a clock. From click to full appearance: 3 minutes and 50 seconds. This is on the long side but NOT UNUSUAL nowadays.
This has gone way beyond my usual comparisons to mechanical processes.
I tried fetching a paper magazine from my bookshelf, finding an interesting article, putting the magazine in the bookholder at my eating table, and sitting down to read it. 30 seconds.
Fetching and drinking a full cup of coffee, fast but not guzzling: 1:30.
I tried reading the actual Discover article. 45 seconds.
Assuming I was already dressed to go out, I could walk a quarter mile in 3:50.
Technology has become a pure obstacle. It doesn't even make business sense. Why would Discover Magazine want to force people to spend 3:50 reading SOMETHING ELSE while waiting impatiently to see the Discover article?
¶ 1:38 AM 
I clicked on it and started waiting. The waiting got longer and longer, so I decided to start again with a clock. From click to full appearance: 3 minutes and 50 seconds. This is on the long side but NOT UNUSUAL nowadays.
This has gone way beyond my usual comparisons to mechanical processes.
I tried fetching a paper magazine from my bookshelf, finding an interesting article, putting the magazine in the bookholder at my eating table, and sitting down to read it. 30 seconds.
Fetching and drinking a full cup of coffee, fast but not guzzling: 1:30.
I tried reading the actual Discover article. 45 seconds.
Assuming I was already dressed to go out, I could walk a quarter mile in 3:50.
Technology has become a pure obstacle. It doesn't even make business sense. Why would Discover Magazine want to force people to spend 3:50 reading SOMETHING ELSE while waiting impatiently to see the Discover article?
¶ 1:38 AM
