Why You Shouldn't Ask a Developer to Fix Your Bike - montgomerycourer1950

Before I started working at Icons8 I was a system executive. I was repairing PC's, doing backups and restoring deleted emails that had of a sudden become very important. But sometimes I got really weird requests. Like mend a light incandescent lamp in women's bathroom (I hope that wasn't an euphemism) or checking along a microwave. One Day I was even asked if I'm good with blenders.

That's the way people tend to see tech masses. Yes, we know stuff: our thrust (in nearly cases). Yet not all tech-agnate stuff is our gormandize. Ironically, even we a great deal think we have a go at it stuff we've ne'er had whatsoever have with. Because we too visualise ourselves as "tech" people.

Thus formed a myth: tech people are tech savvy. Which easy extrapolates into tech hoi polloi are savvy in everything.

Well, if that's true, then tech people can easy repair, say… a bicycle.

Hold on. Bicycles? Yes, bicycles. And before you get afraid that I'm jumping like spiderman from IT to bicycles, let Pine Tree State explain myself.

If you want to repair a bicycle, you throw to know how it works. And if you know how it whole works, you can easily drawing card a bicycle. Near people are confident they know how a bicycle works. And yet, if you ask them to draw a bicycle, their drawings may look like this:

Scientists song this an illusion of knowledge. Our mind more readily convinces us that we know something, than it lets us take that we don't. General Geographic ready-made a unharmed episode about this phenomena where 90% of participants Drew bicycles unrealistically.

In his illustrious undertaking Velocipedia, Gianluca Gimini pushed it even further. he asked different people to pull along a pedal so created 3D-models, based on their sketches:

Soh, 90% of people preceptor't know how a bicycle operates. And one of these days…

In both aforementioned examples (National Georhaphic and Velocipedia project) participants were populate with public knowledge (many an were students). No specific criteria. This is where I got lucky.

Recently we've been training a neural net, whose sole purpose was to recognize icons, sketched by people. We dispatched an email to our drug user database asking our customers to pull whol kinds of things: cars, houses, methamphetamine hydrochloride boxes… and bicycles.

And our audience consists of:

Developers. Half of the people, who we asked to draw a bicycle, were developers. Straightaway the interrogative sentence stands: bequeath 90% of bicycles withal be unrealistic, OR will there live some improvement given the fact that half of the consultation are developers?

Overview

I asked my friend, an technologist and avid biker (told you I'm lucky) to help me analyse 200 drawing of bicycles that we then set back into 4 different categories:

Not rideable: it's usually a real primitive drawing of two wheels and a frame, attached the way that prevents wheels from resounding at all.
Ride past rolling:these bicycles can roll, but seat't turn. Or, sometimes, be sat happening. Indeed these bikes are for very straightforward people, who have no time to sit.
Rideable (just about): these have young issues care no pedals/Chain or redundant structures of frame.
Totally rideable: masses really knew what they were drawing on that point.

Overall 76% drawings are unrealistic, not 90%.

Developers puff bicycles that are in reality rideable slightly Sir Thomas More often.

Ahead we jump to conclusions, however, in that respect are few important factors that could affect this routine.

Constructed Draftsmanship vs. Preconditioned

Before asking my engineer friend for help with analyzing the drawings, I asked him to draw one. Unprepared and receiving no hints. Here's how it went:

Take a look at how he doesn't exercise some prepared mental shortcuts for elements, but constructs the bicycle. It is a constructed draft.

The lines may be irregular and proportions may be messed up, merely that's not important. You'll encounter that these bicycles were also constructed:

On the other side, there are quite a fewer designers among our audience (~30%). Their drawings are very surgical.

These are fain drawings. Fortuitously, only a identical minute helping of completely drawings seemed like prepared ones. So I could conclude two things:

• It does not affect overall numbers that much
• 30% of our audience is designers, yet only if a little portion of drawings were prepared. I suppose not many designers are able to trace a bicycle from memory. By the way, judging aside this experiment, flatbottomed if you give them a reference, it may not be enough.

Former factors

There are a few many factors at bring on here:

Uncontrolled try out

Drawings were not restricted by time and there were atomic number 102 observers – people could google for a reference. However, judging by the number of unusual bicycles, non many a of them did that. Even when given a chance, people calm down prefer to cook up:

"A single designer could not invent this many newborn bike designs in 100 lifetimes. And this is why I look at this collection in such awe." – Gianluca Gimini, Velocipedia

Country

In some countries bikes are more popular than in others. However, exclusive i of our top 5 traffic countries (Japan) is on the list. I'd love to see how good hoi polloi are at drawing bicycles in the Netherlands, where there are more bicycles per soul than horses in the Mongol army.

Closing

With all the factors mentioned, plus statistical faults etc. the number of people, who draw bicycles unrealistically is 5 – 10% bring dow among developers than in oecumenical. But that is a big stretch, for there are so many factors in play: general popularity growth of bikes during net years, gender specifics (92% of developers are men) etc. Yes, I'd like to think techs are savvy, notwithstandin,the Book of Numbers are not that dramatic to be really in for that's because of their business.

So I'll end this article just as I started IT. With my own illustration.

I've repaired hundreds of PC's, configured many network devices. I've never repaired a unmated cycle in my life.

So, later watching hundreds of drawings of bicycles, I've decided to draw one myself. Non to copy it, but to construct it in my chief, from scratch. Non using references and psychological shortcuts:

Though I've had a half dozen of them, I've ne'er had a chance to restore one and never had the need. I messed up the wheeling frame. My bicycle posterior't turn.

I'm non saying technical school people can't fix things. I do believe tech people are savvy, and repairing a wheel is easier than migrating from one frame to another, while coating every bit of code with tests, in a train, victimization a phone… You got it. Everything is possible if you let the motivation.

I'm locution that IT shouldn't personify matter-of-course of them to fix anything. So if you really want me to repair your pedal, try giving me some motive. A cupcake is a worthy start.

---

About the author
Andrew started at Icons8 as a usableness specializer, conducting interviews and usability surveys. He desperately desired to share his findings with our professional community and started writing insightful and funny (sometimes some) stories for our blog.

Source: https://blog.icons8.com/articles/why-you-shouldnt-ask-a-developer-to-fix-your-bike/

Posted by: montgomerycourer1950.blogspot.com

Share this post