Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This doesn't work. Users learn to ignore the message.

I think it depends on the quality of the feedback. Most tooling sucks, so the messages are very literal trace statements peppered through the code. , vs what the user-facing impact will be. When the thing is just spitting raw information at me, I'm probably going to train myself to ignore it. But if it can tell me what is going to happen, in terms that I care about, then I'll pay attention.

Imagine I just entered a command to remove too many servers that will cause an outage:

  "Finished removing servers" 
  (better than no message, I suppose)

  "Finished removing 8 servers"
  (better, it's still too late to prevent my mistake 
    but at least I can figure out the scale of my mistake)

  "8 servers will be removed. Press `y` to continue"
  (better, no indication of impact but if I'm paying
     attention I might catch the mistake)

  "40% capacity (8 servers) will be removed. 
    Load will increase by 66% on the remaining 12 servers. 
    This is above the safety threshold of a 20% increase. 
    You can override by entering `live dangerously`."
  (preemptive safety check--imagine the text is also red so it stands out)

Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact