Why new things blow

Last week, I ventured into a bathroom in Hamilton Hall and left with my hands all wet, requiring me to use my pants as a towel. This time, it wasn’t related to my uncontrollable urethra. Instead, it was due to the replacement of the paper towel dispenser with an electric hand dryer, a device that truly blows.

If you have never ventured into a public bathroom before, you might not understand how an electric hand dryer could be worse than a paper towel dispenser. Hand dryers save paper, cut maintenance costs, and should ultimately get the job of drying hands done. But in fact, most people despise hand dryers, and would like nothing more than to see a world without them. And by “most people”, I don’t just mean me, and a few of my friends. The Web site HandWashingForLife.com also claims that restrooms equipped with only air hand dryers should be avoided because they aren’t hygienic.

But, it can be argued, hand dryers are still relatively new. Like any new idea or project, the public’s resistance to these devices might be more complex, involving perhaps a few unmet expectations and a psychological attachment to their favorite paper alternative. In a way, the electric hand dryer suffers the same problems as most emergent technologies do. New ideas are often met with reluctance, not just because of their initial imperfect implementation, but also because of a tendency of any user to prefer systems already well understood.

Imperfect implementations are a common cause of user frustration, especially on the Web. Take, for example, Google’s implementation of cloud computing, a system that uses remote computers to make information storage separate from information usage. When Google started using cloud computing on Gmail, the service crashed due to issues of scalability. In particular, the failure of one data center led to the failure of others, which, coupled with the inability of highly trafficked servers to work with other servers to slow down simultaneously, led to waves of upset users and critics. Though the idea was good, the execution left much to be desired. The same can be said about the Federal Trade Commission’s new censorship of blogs regarding endorsements, which requires all blogs to disclose any payments they received from the subjects they review. The FTC’s goal was noble, trying to make itself an agency fit for the 21st century. By introducing a harsh set of guidelines without precedent or widespread acceptance, however, the FTC left many bloggers bewildered.

But new systems don’t need to be imperfect to suffer—simply lacking a critical mass for too long is often enough. Such was the case with CUCommunity, Columbia’s old version of Facebook. Though it managed to attract enough attention to go national, the site ultimately failed to pick up enough support to take off before bowing out to Facebook. And, even though CUCommunity ultimately failed because of tough competition, well-implemented systems that don’t face competition can also disappoint. Often, they are deemed too new or too difficult to learn. Some claim that this is the case with Google Wave, a great new service that promises to be the next generation in collaboration tools. Because of its novelty and complexity, critics wonder whether the service will ever become successful, or will simply remain a plaything for avid Google users, like the less successful Knol project, essentially a Google version of Wikipedia.

Ideas on the Web often fail because of lack of user support. Were the fate of the electric hand dryer, like that of most Web applications, to be dependant on acceptance by users, it would be gone from most public bathrooms by now. But, unlike unpopular Web applications, the electric dryers stick around. With time, they even improve. Some electric hand dryers blow harder now than ever, and are automatic.

But many Web site don’t have the same opportunity to improve. When Campus Playbook was introduced on campus a few years ago, for example, many thought it would make for a great calendaring system for campus events. Still, it seemed to require too much effort on the part of individuals—it was not met with the needed support, and failed to live up to expectations. Today, Campus Playbook does not exist.

Tonight, the Application Development Initiative, an organization designed to create a cohesive community of student developers at Columbia, will meet for the first time this semester in Hamilton Hall at 9 p.m. Before, when new ideas were brought to Columbia, many failed because of lack of support. With a proper development community, those failures will help inform others just starting, and hopefully bring more great ideas to fruition.

Akiva Bamberger is a Columbia College junior majoring in computer science and mathematics with a pre-medical concentration. He is president of the Association for Computing Machinery. Bits and Pieces runs alternate Wednesdays. opinion@columbiaspectator.com