The Pilot!


The pilot episode for our new show!

You can watch the episode or listen to it.


Matthew: I’m making a cup of coffee.

Matt: Awesome.

Matthew: So I’m gonna run. Come back.


Matthew: One moment please. So.

Matt: Hey so, I was reading the internet today.

Matthew: Oh the internet, is that still going on?

Matt: And two semi-interesting stories stuck out to me.

Matthew: Really? Okay.

Matt: Yes.

Matthew: I’m listening.

Matt: I’d like your thoughts.

Matthew: Alright.

Matt: One. Trying to decide which to lead with, ’cause they’re both.

Matthew: Put a big one on the screen all of a sudden.

Matt: Right. One is clearly more interesting than the other.

Matthew: Well, I’ll tell you.

Matt: Couldn’t they become more interesting.

Matthew: I’m not telling you how to do good TV, but lead with that one.

Matt: You decide people.

Matthew: That’s right. I report, you decide.

Matt: Right. So this.

Matthew: Go ahead, go ahead.

Matt: This story, with research out of the Ohio State University.

Matthew: Oh.

Matt: You might be familiar with them. Was about. Quality work. Was about peoples’ perception of restaurant menus, and the font of those menus.

Matthew: Okay. Which like from a trustworthiness perspective? Or a.

Matt: In how. Yeah let’s say trustworthy. How likely they were to interact with the brand.

Matthew: Okay.

Matt: Through social media. And so the initial finding that I was looking at is not too surprising. So they did it, maybe at a fictitious restaurant for this first piece of it. And it was, like, based on a wholesome, natural, organic, healthy style restaurant.

Matthew: Okay.

Matt: And so they studied two menus. One with like a handwritten font and one with more like Helvetica, just a standard, computer-looking font. And I guess, not surprisingly to me, the handwritten font was more well received. People connected with it. It better embodied the message from the restaurant, that it was more connected to the user, to the customer, and healthier and less mechanical, if you will.

Matthew: Please tell me they also did the same study with a sports bar as.

Matt: So they did, like, a fast-food restaurant.

Matthew: Yes!

Matt: Yes.

Matthew: Excellent. Now we’re doing some science.

Matt: Yes! And the difference was not as noticeable. So people basically just didn’t care.

Matthew: Right.

Matt: When it was a fast-food restaurant. So, whatever gains you get from that fancy, warm language and fonts is lost, ’cause people can see through it ’cause it’s

Matthew: Right, right.

Matt: The first part didn’t really surprise me that much, but the second part a little bit. And when I say fast-food, not necessarily maybe McDonald’s, but some place that’s not focused on health.

Matthew: Right, right.

Matt: So it could just be a local, like, bar or bistro or something.

Matthew: Right, okay. Alright. I was like waiting to see what brand you’re gonna go.

Matt: Yeah Chipotle, alright, there I said it.

Matthew: Chipotle. That’s what I wanted you to say.

Matt: Yeah, so. That was one of the.

Matthew: Or gas station tacos.

Matt: Gas station tacos. Why didn’t I lead with that one? So the other article I read was about gas station tacos.

Matthew: Oh. Wow. And by read, I mean wrote.

Matt: By read, I meant eaten.

Matthew: You know what, I’m gonna get some tacos. I’ll be right back. You got your water, I’m getting tacos. You wait buddy.

Matt: I’d like to talk about these gas station tacos. Any other questions or thoughts on the controversial menu study? Handwritten versus non-handwritten. Thoughts?

Matthew: No. No.

Matt: Here’s a question for you.

Matthew: I see some of those handwritten font things go a little too far, where it’s really hard to discern what the menu says, so.

Matt: That was actually one of the comments in here, from a real business owner restaurant to. He’s like ‘you gotta make it casual ‘but not too fancy and it has to legible’.

Matthew: Yeah.

Matt: Here’s a question for you.

Matthew: almost like it’s usable, useful and satisfying.

Matt: Yeah.

Matthew: Where have I heard that before?

Matt: I think you just made that up.

Matthew: That’s the ISO definition for usability. Come on.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: ISO-9421. 9241.

Matt: I’ve got that tattooed on my shoulder. You know that.

Matthew: Yeah, I just can’t read it.

Matt: Its in Chinese, I don’t know what it says.

Matthew: Yeah 9241.

Matt: Alright.

Matthew: Anyway, sorry. Just geeking out on International Standards Organization Designations.

Matt: I don’t know you. Thought exercise.

Matthew: Yes!

Matt: Do you know.

Matthew: Wait hold on, hold on.

Matt: This isn’t really a thought exercise.

Matthew: No, I was waiting for the graphic to come up. Thought Exercise. I’m tryna imagine the production of this thing. So, go ahead. Thought exercise.

Matt: Do you know how many different fonts there are?

Matthew: Yes!

Matt: How many?

Matthew: Like 3? A billion. I knew from the way you asked that question that it would either be a lot or a little.

Matt: You’re so right.

Matthew: Yeah, my guess is like half a million. Why?

Matt: I have absolutely no idea. I just thought of it.

Matthew: Oh jeez. I thought you were gonna say like ‘well it was a thought experiment because I wanted to know ‘what you know because I noticed this article, ‘next to this other article and they were related’

Matt: Way too much credit.

Matthew: and it turns out ‘there’s like 273,546 different fonts’

Matt: Yeah you give me way too much credit. According to Google there are, perhaps, 300,000 fonts in the world. That’s free-range, not in captivity.

Matthew: Oh, right yeah. Well I was.

Matt: You were like 2/3 not even 2/3.

Matthew:I was not closest without going over.

Matt: No.

Matthew: Is basically what that comes down to.

Matt: But one was closer to a billion, or 3 was closer to a billion.

Matthew: That’s true. So I was close. Do I win something? No.

Matt: Yes. You can continue hosting this very interesting discussion.

Matthew: Alright. So, fun experiment doo-doo-doo-doo.

Matt: Yeah.

Matthew: Put a sting right here. There we go.

Matt: Need to hold up a piece of paper.

Matthew: We’ll have some, like, really low rent graphics where they’re just, like, little cards.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: Hold on. And then hold it up. There we go. Cut. And there’s just one that says ‘outro music’ and it’s like no, no the wrong card. Oh, right. Yeah. Anyway.

Matt: Anyway.

Matthew: You were saying? Two articles.

Matt: Yes. So this other article, you can decide if it’s more or less interesting than the first.

Matthew: Okay, alright. This is the interactive portion of the talk.

Matt: Please, your three buzzers in front of you. There’s an experiment going on at, where is this? I believe it’s in Los Angeles, at Cedar-Sinai Hospital. Did you read about this? They are putting Alexa devices in hospital rooms.

Matthew: Yes. I saw that this morning.

Matt: Yes, you saw the same article.

Matthew: I actually have opinions on this.

Matt: I cannot believe it. So you read the same article? Why don’t you quickly explain, summarize, the article for me.

Matthew: So.

Matt: Test you to make sure you actually read it.

Matthew: Right. So Cedars Mount Sanai, in Los Angeles, is putting Alexa devices in hospital rooms. The end.

Matt: So, so.

Matthew: But the point is, for them to be able to be like, you know, I can’t move, or I shouldn’t move and say ‘hey Alexa, please give me more pain meds’ or, ‘I need to go to the bathroom’ or whatever. And then that message will somehow be relayed, through the Alexa system, to the nursing station or whatever.

Matt: Yeah.

Matthew: I’m like well okay. So first off, this was shared in a slack that I’m in. And, you know, as you and I were talking before we started recording that, Slack will put the URL and then it does the under referral and then it shows an image and stuff. At first I thought it was an onion article. Because the image that came with it looked. Who the put the image there? Here. I don’t know. Image looked a little too staged. And it just looked like an onion thing. Like, why would they put Alexa devices in there? Because. Like, why would a hospital think that was okay given that HIPAA is so important. And you know. Even my phone, brought to you by Google, is listening to me right now because I can say ‘okay Google’. And, you know, it’s locked, but it’s listening.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: So, that’s what the Alexa does too. What is it doing with that information?

Matt: Well that’s been controversial for other applications ’cause they’ll say it listens, but doesn’t record until you give that keyword. But obviously they’ve already proven that’s not always the case.

Matthew: And the airlines that have the cameras in the backseats.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: Of the entertainment things, aren’t watching you at all.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: We didn’t turn them on.

Matt: Right, I know I’m not disagreeing. So, it’s where do you draw the line between accessibility and privacy? I guess.

Matthew: Well I think where I draw the line is, what problem are you trying to solve? You know, I’m not saying it’s the best thing, but we’ve done pretty well with having the call button. And I recognize that not everybody can press a button.

Matt: Right.

Matthew: But. Why is it an Alexa device, and not a start-up that is essentially white-labeling a hardware and software system to the hospital where the information stays in the hospital?

Matt: Right. Yeah. To me, I almost feel like they’re leveraging Alexa to prove the concept. And I would hope they wouldn’t roll that out.

Matthew: Did that. Was that in the article that they’re doing that?

Matt: I don’t think it was, but that’s how I.

Matthew: I mean I guess it does say pilot program.

Matt: Right. Because. ‘Cause, one of the powers of this, at least that I can read from the article, the advantage over a button is that it can route the need to the right person. So if they just need help getting to the restroom, they’re not gonna call a doctor.

Matthew: Right, right. And we certainly wouldn’t wanna make a push button device that had, you know, becomes a remote, like the TV remotes have gotten out of control with all the buttons on them.

Matt: Right. Or have, like, four different buttons to call either the nurse, the doctor, I forget the other name, the orderly or whatever.

Matthew: I just, I’m not against it conceptually. The problem I have with it is that it’s Amazon Alexa.

Matt: Yep.

Matthew: As opposed to a voice interactive device, that is not Amazon. And then the other problem I have with it is voice. So there’s two things. Like, you know, I know voice will get better over time, but right now it isn’t great. The amount of times I’ve yelled at my phone because it can’t set a timer for 15 minutes and sets it for 50 minutes instead. Even like, it gets worse the more I annunciate. It’s almost like it’s designed for mumbling. So it doesn’t always get things right.

Matt: Definitely.

Matthew: But also because there’s no. It’s almost like command line interacting with your computer. You have to know the architecture of the interface, in your brain. So the patients have to then be trained to say this, this or this, before they say the request. Or otherwise, there’s gotta be some trigger. Because I can imagine like a family visiting someone in the hospital are the kids are like Alexa play this song, Alexa, you know? And it’s like, is that what it’s really for? I don’t know. It’s a pilot program, and that’s great.

Matt: I think it’s got a lot of opportunity. Put it that way. Especially for patients with mobility issues, who maybe don’t have family coming to visit them and are basically alone, in a room, for 23 hours a day.

Matthew: Yeah. It does say that it’s through a start-up using the devices. Probably because they just do the software. So, mixed feelings.

Matt: Fair enough.

Matthew: Mixed feelings and, you know, as was the case in point with a client recently, admitting that they don’t know if they were asking the right questions when they were doing the research themselves. And what biases are in place with this pilot program that might lead them to faulty assumptions and paths that don’t make sense to follow.

Matt: Hopefully they’re learning as they go through this pilot.

Matthew: Increments, increments.

Matt: That’s right

Matthew: I’ll flash that image up on the screen.

Matt: Yeah. And I know the image you’re talking about.

Matthew: Hi Greg.

Matt: That’s what I’ve got today.

Matthew: Alright, well that was good one. I liked that. The second one was better than the first one.

Matt: I knew it.

Matthew: I think you purposefully messed with me. You were like, he cares more about healthcare than menus. And then I’d be like, actually, I love good food, so.

Matt: Right. It’s a flip of the coin my friend.


Related Post