Oh that is intriguing:) tech that promotes transparency On Mon, Sep 14, 2020, 8:47 PM Alaric Snell-Pym <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/09/2020 17:55, Nisha Susan wrote: > > Hello Alaric :) > > > > My short stories are about all the changes Indians experiences in our > > personal lives over the last 25 years with the arrival of the internet. > My > > stories are set in different contexts, big cities, small towns. The title > > story is set in 2001 where the internet barely figures in the lives of > two > > young women who spend all their time in a bar. The last story is set in > > 2018 in Bangalore in the office of a fictional internet giant. > > Mmm, the way technology changes people's lives is endlessly fascinating; > it's something we as a species need to get better at understanding in > order to design technologies to have better impacts... > > > What kind of things do you invent? > > By day, I'm usually being paid to invent computer software! I say > "invent" rather than "write" as I try to focus on things where I'm > making the computer do new things (which requires a lot more creativity > and, thus, fun) rather than doing stuff that's been done before. In my > free time I do a bit of that, combined with a smattering of electronics > and mechanical engineering... I've just started a new job, but in the > months between my old job that this one, I've been working on a computer > game! So the way technology affects people has been close to my mind for > that. There's a lot of "casual games" around right now which try to > appeal to the bits of people's brains that get addicted to things so > they can make money by showing people adverts, in a way that I find > quite reprehensible. On the other hand, I want to make my game engaging > and not something that people will get bored of - so where's the line > between making it *interesting* and *fun*, versus making it *addictive*? > I'd like the game to be able to make money (although my main goal is fun > for myself and the players, I can create more fun for us all if the game > makes enough money that I don't need to have a day job any more!), but > how can I structure that so that my incentives are still aligned with > the players, rather than turning them into the product? > > I have a long-standing distaste for ad-funded services - see > > https://www.snell-pym.org.uk/archives/2018/04/22/dont-fund-your-online-business-with-advertising-itll-only-make-everyone-hate-you/ > for the full rant on that - so I am drawn towards the model where anyone > can play the game for free, but people who pay a monthly subscription > (£5? £10?) get some purely stylistic perks. > > This means: > > - Paying money doesn't make you "better" at the game, so you're not > driven to "pay to win" > - As it's a monthly sub, you can't spend any more than that unless you > sign up multiple accounts, which I'm designing the game to give you no > in-game advantages for so doing. > - The perks are still fun, so players who can afford it will be > motivated to do so. > > However, computer games are perhaps the most user-facing thing I tend to > get involved in - most of my inventing is low-level technical stuff! My > specialty is systems infrastructure - programming languages, network > protocols, operating systems, databases, that sort of thing. My new job > is working on a mechanism for official bodies to publish registers of > important stuff they're required to publish, in a way that can show > clear evidence of tampering and establishes chains of trust and all that! > > -- > Alaric Snell-Pym (2E0LOJ neé M7KIT) > http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ > >
