1
00:00:09,880 --> 00:00:12,960
Speaker 1: You can get a high score on anything nowadays, Duel

2
00:00:13,000 --> 00:00:17,040
Speaker 1: lingo gives you a streak, fitness trackers give you health scores,

3
00:00:17,120 --> 00:00:20,000
Speaker 1: and before you post that TikTok, you're probably thinking about

4
00:00:20,000 --> 00:00:22,000
Speaker 1: how far you can push up that number of likes

5
00:00:22,000 --> 00:00:26,000
Speaker 1: and follows. It seems like everything in life has become

6
00:00:26,000 --> 00:00:26,400
Speaker 1: a game.

7
00:00:27,160 --> 00:00:31,640
Speaker 2: The world is constantly scoring us, and the scoring systems

8
00:00:31,640 --> 00:00:34,680
Speaker 2: in games and the scoring systems in the world are

9
00:00:34,720 --> 00:00:37,000
Speaker 2: actually weirdly similar.

10
00:00:38,159 --> 00:00:41,080
Speaker 1: Teenwin is an associate professor of philosophy at the University

11
00:00:41,080 --> 00:00:43,440
Speaker 1: of Utah. He just wrote a book called The Score

12
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,639
Speaker 1: that's about why scoring systems work for games, but how

13
00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:48,960
Speaker 1: they don't work when other things are gamified.

14
00:00:49,440 --> 00:00:52,320
Speaker 2: So the scoring system is some kind of official declaration of

15
00:00:52,360 --> 00:00:54,280
Speaker 2: how we're going to count things together and or how

16
00:00:54,320 --> 00:00:56,960
Speaker 2: we're going to count success together. The weird puzzle that

17
00:00:57,000 --> 00:01:00,720
Speaker 2: got me writing this whole book was that I had

18
00:01:00,800 --> 00:01:03,520
Speaker 2: one story I'd built over a book and some papers

19
00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:06,600
Speaker 2: about solf scoring systems and games made it possible to

20
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:10,039
Speaker 2: play and be free and be fluid and explore. And

21
00:01:10,080 --> 00:01:15,240
Speaker 2: then that another story built in thinking about bureaucracies of

22
00:01:15,319 --> 00:01:19,280
Speaker 2: how how scoring systems were pernicious trained the life out

23
00:01:19,319 --> 00:01:22,040
Speaker 2: of communities, drained the joy out of things, and then

24
00:01:22,080 --> 00:01:25,680
Speaker 2: I was like, crap, wait, are these things opposite or

25
00:01:25,720 --> 00:01:26,720
Speaker 2: is there a bigger picture?

26
00:01:27,600 --> 00:01:30,200
Speaker 1: You might have felt this yourself. Maybe it's a gamified

27
00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:33,040
Speaker 1: app that's supposed to motivate you to exercise or learn,

28
00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:35,840
Speaker 1: but then you end up just hyper focusing on the numbers,

29
00:01:36,120 --> 00:01:38,080
Speaker 1: or you just get addicted to the app and the

30
00:01:38,160 --> 00:01:41,839
Speaker 1: activity itself isn't even fun anymore. A lot of times

31
00:01:41,880 --> 00:01:45,720
Speaker 1: gamification leads to you getting played. So in today's episode,

32
00:01:45,720 --> 00:01:49,080
Speaker 1: we talk about when gamification works, when it doesn't, and

33
00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:51,320
Speaker 1: also some of the weird things that can happen when

34
00:01:51,360 --> 00:01:59,400
Speaker 1: a philosopher decides to study video games from Kaleidoscope and

35
00:01:59,440 --> 00:02:05,440
Speaker 1: IHEARTPI cast. This is kill switch.

36
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,320
Speaker 3: Discronized.

37
00:02:08,280 --> 00:02:09,160
Speaker 1: I'm Dexter Thomas.

38
00:02:12,919 --> 00:02:50,239
Speaker 3: I'm sorry, m m m M, I'm sorry, sorry, goodbye.

39
00:02:55,120 --> 00:02:57,040
Speaker 1: Is there a point where you have noticed that we

40
00:02:57,320 --> 00:03:01,000
Speaker 1: really started as a society started using the raise gamification

41
00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:02,880
Speaker 1: and really bringing that into everything else.

42
00:03:03,320 --> 00:03:06,320
Speaker 2: Yeah, the I'm not sure when it started, but the

43
00:03:06,440 --> 00:03:10,000
Speaker 2: moment it got really popular was Jane mcgonagall's book Reality

44
00:03:10,080 --> 00:03:12,840
Speaker 2: Is Broken, which really pushed the idea that you know,

45
00:03:13,280 --> 00:03:16,640
Speaker 2: games are fun, they're really engaging, and other parts of

46
00:03:16,639 --> 00:03:19,000
Speaker 2: life are grinding and boring, and so if we apply

47
00:03:19,120 --> 00:03:22,280
Speaker 2: those things, we can make things more fun.

48
00:03:22,639 --> 00:03:25,639
Speaker 1: In twenty eleven, a game designer and researcher named Jane

49
00:03:25,680 --> 00:03:29,000
Speaker 1: McGonagall put out a book called Reality Is Broken. Why

50
00:03:29,080 --> 00:03:31,880
Speaker 1: Games make Us Better and How they Can Change the World,

51
00:03:32,040 --> 00:03:34,040
Speaker 1: And one of her main arguments was that we could

52
00:03:34,040 --> 00:03:36,160
Speaker 1: apply game mechanics to various parts of.

53
00:03:36,080 --> 00:03:38,880
Speaker 4: Our life and then we get all this positive feedback.

54
00:03:38,920 --> 00:03:41,000
Speaker 4: You guys have heard of leveling up and plus one's

55
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:43,960
Speaker 4: strength and plus once intelligence. We don't get that kind

56
00:03:43,960 --> 00:03:45,840
Speaker 4: of constant feedback in real life. When I get off

57
00:03:45,880 --> 00:03:48,200
Speaker 4: the stage, I'm not going to have, you know, plus

58
00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:53,360
Speaker 4: one speaking and plus one crazy idea plus twenty crazy idea.

59
00:03:53,720 --> 00:03:55,360
Speaker 4: I don't get that feedback in real life.

60
00:03:55,560 --> 00:03:58,040
Speaker 1: That's Jane McGonagall and her ted talk back in twenty ten,

61
00:03:58,320 --> 00:04:00,760
Speaker 1: and her thesis back then about Game of Vacation was

62
00:04:00,840 --> 00:04:03,920
Speaker 1: really optimistic. She proposed that we could use the structure

63
00:04:03,960 --> 00:04:07,600
Speaker 1: of games to solve real world problems like depression or obesity,

64
00:04:07,880 --> 00:04:10,760
Speaker 1: even all the way up to global issues like climate change.

65
00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:11,680
Speaker 2: When I look.

66
00:04:11,520 --> 00:04:13,760
Speaker 4: Forward to the next decade, I know two things for

67
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:17,640
Speaker 4: sure that we can make any future we can imagine,

68
00:04:17,920 --> 00:04:20,800
Speaker 4: and we can play any games we want. So I say,

69
00:04:20,880 --> 00:04:22,359
Speaker 4: let the world changing games begin.

70
00:04:22,680 --> 00:04:23,000
Speaker 1: Thank you.

71
00:04:24,680 --> 00:04:26,600
Speaker 2: She was not the first person to start. But for me,

72
00:04:27,279 --> 00:04:29,240
Speaker 2: this book is like the moment where it goes from

73
00:04:29,240 --> 00:04:31,680
Speaker 2: a background thing to like something that is on the

74
00:04:31,680 --> 00:04:32,919
Speaker 2: tip of everyone's tongue.

75
00:04:33,360 --> 00:04:36,840
Speaker 1: And really, this gamification stuff was already everywhere. A few

76
00:04:36,880 --> 00:04:40,200
Speaker 1: days before that Ted talk was posted online, Starbucks announced

77
00:04:40,240 --> 00:04:42,760
Speaker 1: that if you checked into a Starbucks location five times,

78
00:04:43,000 --> 00:04:45,679
Speaker 1: you would get a barista badge on the four Square app.

79
00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:48,159
Speaker 1: At that point, that was all you would get, just

80
00:04:48,200 --> 00:04:50,720
Speaker 1: a badge, not even a discount on a latte. They

81
00:04:50,760 --> 00:04:53,960
Speaker 1: eventually did add those perks too, but for a while

82
00:04:54,080 --> 00:04:57,680
Speaker 1: it was just gamification for gamification's sake. It's gotten more

83
00:04:57,680 --> 00:05:01,159
Speaker 1: sophisticated since then, and gamification is in every part of

84
00:05:01,160 --> 00:05:05,640
Speaker 1: our lives now, exercises, gamified household chores, of gamified man.

85
00:05:05,760 --> 00:05:07,760
Speaker 1: I logged into my bank app today and it told

86
00:05:07,760 --> 00:05:10,520
Speaker 1: me that if I read their little article about password security,

87
00:05:10,760 --> 00:05:14,080
Speaker 1: I could get a security scholar badge. And it kind

88
00:05:14,120 --> 00:05:16,600
Speaker 1: of makes sense. Games are fun. A lot of us

89
00:05:16,680 --> 00:05:19,000
Speaker 1: like playing games, so why can't we bring some of

90
00:05:19,040 --> 00:05:20,839
Speaker 1: that fun into ordinary life.

91
00:05:21,080 --> 00:05:22,600
Speaker 2: A lot of what I've been trying to figure out

92
00:05:22,640 --> 00:05:26,480
Speaker 2: is why that doesn't work. This is probably a familiar

93
00:05:26,520 --> 00:05:28,039
Speaker 2: story for a lot of people. Like I wanted to

94
00:05:28,040 --> 00:05:31,000
Speaker 2: get healthier. I started exercising a little bit, I started

95
00:05:31,040 --> 00:05:33,520
Speaker 2: watching my nutrition a bit. I got better. Then I

96
00:05:33,560 --> 00:05:36,520
Speaker 2: got an app that tracked my nutrition, and I started

97
00:05:36,560 --> 00:05:39,719
Speaker 2: losing weight. And then I just became obsessed with losing

98
00:05:39,760 --> 00:05:45,880
Speaker 2: weight and maximizing my whatever, like my macro count, and

99
00:05:45,920 --> 00:05:48,800
Speaker 2: it made me miserable. I stopped having any joy in

100
00:05:48,920 --> 00:05:51,360
Speaker 2: eating or like like, I just became obsessed with this

101
00:05:51,640 --> 00:05:57,400
Speaker 2: dry app tracking weight loss thing, and I don't think

102
00:05:57,440 --> 00:06:02,760
Speaker 2: I got particularly healthier. I just made my weight numbers

103
00:06:02,800 --> 00:06:04,440
Speaker 2: go down and got miserable.

104
00:06:05,600 --> 00:06:08,920
Speaker 1: This phenomenon is what teen Winging calls value capture.

105
00:06:09,240 --> 00:06:11,840
Speaker 2: Value capture is the term I came up with while

106
00:06:11,880 --> 00:06:15,400
Speaker 2: trying to understand why I was so uncomfortable with gamifications,

107
00:06:15,920 --> 00:06:18,560
Speaker 2: even though I love games. So value capture is any

108
00:06:18,560 --> 00:06:22,800
Speaker 2: case where your values are rich and subtle and dynamic

109
00:06:22,960 --> 00:06:25,240
Speaker 2: or developing that way, and then you get parked in

110
00:06:25,240 --> 00:06:28,960
Speaker 2: a social setting or an institution that gives you a simplified,

111
00:06:29,480 --> 00:06:33,479
Speaker 2: typically quantified version of your values, and then the simplified

112
00:06:33,520 --> 00:06:38,320
Speaker 2: version takes over. Right. You start exercising for health and joy,

113
00:06:38,400 --> 00:06:40,719
Speaker 2: and you come out obsessed with either your weight or

114
00:06:40,760 --> 00:06:43,760
Speaker 2: your step count or your vo two max. Right. You

115
00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:46,560
Speaker 2: go into academia like me, for the love of philosophy,

116
00:06:46,600 --> 00:06:48,800
Speaker 2: and you come out obsessed with your citation rate and

117
00:06:48,839 --> 00:06:51,839
Speaker 2: your publication rate. Right. So it's something where it seems

118
00:06:51,839 --> 00:06:57,840
Speaker 2: like your values collapse around a very simplified external target.

119
00:06:59,560 --> 00:07:02,840
Speaker 1: And value capture can hit everything and everyone.

120
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:06,560
Speaker 2: I was talking to a pastor and he was like, yeah,

121
00:07:06,760 --> 00:07:10,360
Speaker 2: you know, like his church had developed an internal leaderboard

122
00:07:10,360 --> 00:07:17,360
Speaker 2: of who is getting more baptisms and he had found yes. Right.

123
00:07:18,040 --> 00:07:20,720
Speaker 2: He said that he had started realizing he stopped tuning

124
00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:23,720
Speaker 2: his sermons for spiritual growth and started tuning them for

125
00:07:23,800 --> 00:07:26,680
Speaker 2: popularity so we could go up the baptism leaderboard.

126
00:07:27,360 --> 00:07:32,320
Speaker 1: Yo, we have algorithmatized Jesus Like, come on, man, are

127
00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:37,840
Speaker 1: you surprised? No, I'm not. I'm not, but yo, yo,

128
00:07:38,000 --> 00:07:40,200
Speaker 1: gamify baptisms is wild.

129
00:07:40,600 --> 00:07:43,240
Speaker 2: Okay, I'm gonna give you one of my favorite examples

130
00:07:43,360 --> 00:07:46,760
Speaker 2: that actually has gotten cut from the book because there

131
00:07:46,880 --> 00:07:49,800
Speaker 2: was dissent about whether it was too gross or not.

132
00:07:49,880 --> 00:07:51,640
Speaker 2: But I think I have to I was doing, I

133
00:07:51,680 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 2: need to talk to it. So the thing we're really

134
00:07:54,320 --> 00:07:56,560
Speaker 2: interested in is the way that the invasion of scoring

135
00:07:56,640 --> 00:07:59,280
Speaker 2: system changes our targets and undermines what we were actually

136
00:07:59,320 --> 00:08:01,880
Speaker 2: trying to do. And one place where this becomes incredibly

137
00:08:01,880 --> 00:08:06,000
Speaker 2: obvious is pick up artists, because pick up artists are

138
00:08:06,520 --> 00:08:08,480
Speaker 2: I mean, it's even in the language, like what do

139
00:08:08,560 --> 00:08:10,440
Speaker 2: people talk about when they're competing in this way? They

140
00:08:10,440 --> 00:08:13,760
Speaker 2: talk about scoring, right, that's even the term we use,

141
00:08:13,880 --> 00:08:18,120
Speaker 2: yes or people use. So really interestingly, I found that

142
00:08:18,160 --> 00:08:21,040
Speaker 2: there's a little literature of sociologists and anthropologists so it

143
00:08:21,120 --> 00:08:25,600
Speaker 2: studied pick up artists, and it's depressing because what I

144
00:08:25,640 --> 00:08:29,200
Speaker 2: found out was that pick up artists typically compete for

145
00:08:29,560 --> 00:08:31,760
Speaker 2: romantic success in some way. So some of the things

146
00:08:31,760 --> 00:08:34,080
Speaker 2: that are typically competed for are like number of phone numbers,

147
00:08:34,440 --> 00:08:39,080
Speaker 2: number of sexual act, speed for meeting someone to having

148
00:08:39,080 --> 00:08:41,720
Speaker 2: a sexual act, like, they compete for all kinds of things,

149
00:08:42,520 --> 00:08:45,480
Speaker 2: and things they don't compete for. This is the important thing.

150
00:08:45,800 --> 00:08:47,840
Speaker 2: Things pick up artists never compete for are number of

151
00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:51,839
Speaker 2: healthy relationships. They don't compete for like romance, and they

152
00:08:51,840 --> 00:08:53,679
Speaker 2: don't even and this is something that I found out

153
00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:57,280
Speaker 2: from an anthropologist named Eric Hendrix, who embedded with pick

154
00:08:57,360 --> 00:09:00,200
Speaker 2: up artists royile they don't compete for how much they

155
00:09:00,360 --> 00:09:04,880
Speaker 2: enjoyed a sexual encounter. In fact, a general theme, he says,

156
00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:07,440
Speaker 2: of pick up artists culture is the need to cleanse

157
00:09:07,480 --> 00:09:10,440
Speaker 2: yourself of any like being willing to suffer and work

158
00:09:10,520 --> 00:09:14,320
Speaker 2: hard and stop having to think about pleasure or enjoyment

159
00:09:14,360 --> 00:09:18,000
Speaker 2: in order to win, to win? What exactly? Okay? And

160
00:09:18,040 --> 00:09:20,959
Speaker 2: so I mean? I had thought when I started reading

161
00:09:20,960 --> 00:09:22,960
Speaker 2: this stuff that it would turn out that pick up

162
00:09:23,040 --> 00:09:27,840
Speaker 2: artists were evil, but at least enjoying themselves. And what

163
00:09:27,920 --> 00:09:32,120
Speaker 2: I found was so much worse, Like even enjoyment and

164
00:09:32,200 --> 00:09:35,440
Speaker 2: pleasure has been sacrificed on the alter of number go up.

165
00:09:36,120 --> 00:09:39,440
Speaker 2: My worry is that in some way we are all

166
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:44,000
Speaker 2: pick up artists. We have all sacrificed what matters on

167
00:09:44,120 --> 00:09:47,520
Speaker 2: the altar of going up in a publicly accountable, agreed

168
00:09:47,600 --> 00:09:48,120
Speaker 2: upon way.

169
00:09:50,240 --> 00:09:52,800
Speaker 1: So why is it that games can be fun and rewarding,

170
00:09:53,120 --> 00:09:56,520
Speaker 1: but gamification of real world activity can screw up your

171
00:09:56,559 --> 00:10:10,040
Speaker 1: internal value system? We'll get into that after the The

172
00:10:10,120 --> 00:10:12,920
Speaker 1: thing that games and game of five metrics have in

173
00:10:12,920 --> 00:10:16,559
Speaker 1: common is that they've both created a measurable goal and

174
00:10:16,600 --> 00:10:19,120
Speaker 1: a way to get there. In other words, a scoring

175
00:10:19,160 --> 00:10:21,960
Speaker 1: system in basketball that can look like putting the ball

176
00:10:22,000 --> 00:10:24,560
Speaker 1: through the hoop more than the other team. Of Twitter,

177
00:10:24,679 --> 00:10:26,839
Speaker 1: that can look like getting a certain number of likes

178
00:10:26,880 --> 00:10:27,680
Speaker 1: and retweets.

179
00:10:28,280 --> 00:10:31,640
Speaker 2: There's something really pleasing and clarifying about having that scoring system.

180
00:10:31,760 --> 00:10:34,240
Speaker 2: There is a pleasure to knowing like, oh shit, my

181
00:10:34,559 --> 00:10:37,480
Speaker 2: tweet went viral and I can tell you very clearly

182
00:10:37,520 --> 00:10:39,800
Speaker 2: that this is like ten times more popular. But I

183
00:10:39,840 --> 00:10:42,760
Speaker 2: think there's a deep difference between them. So one of

184
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,560
Speaker 2: my favorite game designers, Ryan or Knittia, who's this incredible

185
00:10:45,720 --> 00:10:48,800
Speaker 2: German board game designer. He says the most important part

186
00:10:48,840 --> 00:10:52,640
Speaker 2: in his game designer toolkit is the scoring system because

187
00:10:52,640 --> 00:10:56,120
Speaker 2: it sets the player's motivations. But what a game designer

188
00:10:56,160 --> 00:10:58,760
Speaker 2: does is they screw around with the score.

189
00:10:58,520 --> 00:11:01,640
Speaker 1: To get the effect they want. What Team means by

190
00:11:01,679 --> 00:11:04,160
Speaker 1: this is that a game designer will tweak a scoring

191
00:11:04,200 --> 00:11:06,880
Speaker 1: system to get you, the player, to have the kind

192
00:11:06,920 --> 00:11:09,680
Speaker 1: of experience that they want you to have. One of

193
00:11:09,679 --> 00:11:11,520
Speaker 1: the examples that he lays on his book is the

194
00:11:11,559 --> 00:11:14,680
Speaker 1: difference between dungeons and dragons and this other variant called

195
00:11:14,760 --> 00:11:18,080
Speaker 1: Lady Blackbird. So one of the problems that some people

196
00:11:18,120 --> 00:11:20,840
Speaker 1: have with Dungeons and Dragons is that some people just

197
00:11:20,960 --> 00:11:23,079
Speaker 1: don't get into the story all that much. They just

198
00:11:23,120 --> 00:11:26,000
Speaker 1: spin the whole game killing stuff. You're incentivized to do

199
00:11:26,040 --> 00:11:29,319
Speaker 1: that because that's how you get points. So someone made

200
00:11:29,320 --> 00:11:32,040
Speaker 1: this game called Lady Blackbird where you get points for

201
00:11:32,200 --> 00:11:35,640
Speaker 1: acting in character and for getting in trouble with other characters.

202
00:11:36,040 --> 00:11:38,920
Speaker 1: So instead of focusing on your kill rate, you focus

203
00:11:38,960 --> 00:11:42,079
Speaker 1: on telling an interesting story along with everyone else.

204
00:11:42,960 --> 00:11:45,440
Speaker 2: For the game designer, the scoring system is part of

205
00:11:45,440 --> 00:11:50,000
Speaker 2: their artistic medium right. Their medium is agency. They are

206
00:11:50,120 --> 00:11:52,960
Speaker 2: changing what you can do and what you're trying to do,

207
00:11:54,200 --> 00:11:58,520
Speaker 2: but not because of the outcome necessarily, but to build

208
00:11:58,559 --> 00:12:00,400
Speaker 2: some like really interesting activity.

209
00:12:00,840 --> 00:12:03,360
Speaker 1: And this also applies to Game of five metrics too.

210
00:12:03,720 --> 00:12:06,600
Speaker 1: The designers of Dual Lingo are using the artistic medium

211
00:12:06,679 --> 00:12:09,160
Speaker 1: of a scoring system by giving you a goal and

212
00:12:09,320 --> 00:12:11,679
Speaker 1: kind of nudging you toward that goal with certain behavior,

213
00:12:12,000 --> 00:12:14,800
Speaker 1: just like the designer of Lady Blackbird is. Lady Blackbird

214
00:12:14,840 --> 00:12:16,720
Speaker 1: wants you to have fun with your friends by telling

215
00:12:16,720 --> 00:12:19,520
Speaker 1: a wild story, and at least on the surface, Dual

216
00:12:19,559 --> 00:12:22,040
Speaker 1: Lingo wants you to learn language by keeping up a

217
00:12:22,080 --> 00:12:24,079
Speaker 1: consistent streak of days on their app.

218
00:12:25,200 --> 00:12:27,160
Speaker 2: First thing it's clear is that game designers are pushing

219
00:12:27,280 --> 00:12:31,200
Speaker 2: things around for you, and most bureaucratic systems are not.

220
00:12:31,679 --> 00:12:35,480
Speaker 2: Amazon is not tweaking its leaderboard for the sake of

221
00:12:35,520 --> 00:12:38,560
Speaker 2: the joy of its warehouse workers, right, It's tweaking it

222
00:12:38,600 --> 00:12:42,199
Speaker 2: for some other purpose, for its own, for corporate efficiency.

223
00:12:43,800 --> 00:12:46,360
Speaker 1: So this is where things start to break down. A

224
00:12:46,360 --> 00:12:48,760
Speaker 1: scoring system in a game gives you an objective to

225
00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:51,800
Speaker 1: work towards. It can make a game fun and rewarding.

226
00:12:52,280 --> 00:12:56,520
Speaker 1: But when the gamification's objective is not fun but instead

227
00:12:56,520 --> 00:13:00,200
Speaker 1: its engagement or efficiency, it can start to get manipult

228
00:13:00,559 --> 00:13:01,800
Speaker 1: or even exploitative.

229
00:13:02,600 --> 00:13:03,360
Speaker 2: So, going back to.

230
00:13:03,320 --> 00:13:05,760
Speaker 1: Duo Lingo, a few years ago, they changed the way

231
00:13:05,760 --> 00:13:09,199
Speaker 1: that their streak counter worked. Du Lingo has a daily goal,

232
00:13:09,240 --> 00:13:11,760
Speaker 1: which is usually made up of a handful of lessons,

233
00:13:11,880 --> 00:13:15,320
Speaker 1: maybe speaking, reading, and so on, and to keep that

234
00:13:15,320 --> 00:13:17,920
Speaker 1: streak going, you had to do all those lessons to

235
00:13:17,960 --> 00:13:20,920
Speaker 1: fulfill the daily goal. But then they changed it so

236
00:13:20,960 --> 00:13:23,240
Speaker 1: that you don't have to hit that daily goal. You

237
00:13:23,280 --> 00:13:25,960
Speaker 1: could just complete one single lesson and the streak would

238
00:13:26,080 --> 00:13:29,079
Speaker 1: keep going. This leads to more people using the app

239
00:13:29,120 --> 00:13:32,040
Speaker 1: every day, which is great for dual Lingo But on

240
00:13:32,080 --> 00:13:35,160
Speaker 1: the other hand, less people were actually reaching their daily

241
00:13:35,240 --> 00:13:38,640
Speaker 1: goals after that change. If the point of using duo

242
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:41,600
Speaker 1: Lingo is to learn a language, then not pushing you

243
00:13:41,640 --> 00:13:45,240
Speaker 1: towards hitting those daily goals seems counterproductive. I mean, you

244
00:13:45,240 --> 00:13:47,959
Speaker 1: could very easily do just one short lesson a day

245
00:13:48,240 --> 00:13:50,920
Speaker 1: and you're not really moving any closer to being able

246
00:13:50,960 --> 00:13:53,760
Speaker 1: to speak French or Japanese. But what if the point

247
00:13:53,760 --> 00:13:56,960
Speaker 1: of dual Lingo isn't actually to teach you that language.

248
00:13:57,160 --> 00:13:59,160
Speaker 1: What if it's just to keep you using their app

249
00:13:59,200 --> 00:14:02,319
Speaker 1: every day so they can make money. In that case,

250
00:14:02,440 --> 00:14:05,920
Speaker 1: that change would be a big success. And okay, maybe

251
00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:09,000
Speaker 1: dual Lingo's use of gamification is pretty harmless. I mean,

252
00:14:09,080 --> 00:14:12,120
Speaker 1: maybe you can't order baguettes like a native Parisian or

253
00:14:12,160 --> 00:14:16,040
Speaker 1: you gotta watch dubbed anime. But there are more insidious

254
00:14:16,120 --> 00:14:19,720
Speaker 1: versions of this, like, as Tina went mentioned, the Amazon

255
00:14:19,800 --> 00:14:21,320
Speaker 1: leader board, How's it damn.

256
00:14:23,760 --> 00:14:24,080
Speaker 2: Okay?

257
00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:26,080
Speaker 1: So, for those of y'all listening to the audio version

258
00:14:26,080 --> 00:14:29,040
Speaker 1: of the podcast, that was a TikTok video from twenty

259
00:14:29,040 --> 00:14:32,520
Speaker 1: twenty one that showed a leaderboard of one of Amazon's warehouses,

260
00:14:32,920 --> 00:14:35,280
Speaker 1: and according to the video, some of the achievements that

261
00:14:35,320 --> 00:14:39,360
Speaker 1: you could strive for were punctual picking up Speed or

262
00:14:39,440 --> 00:14:42,520
Speaker 1: the big one, make History, and in order to get

263
00:14:42,560 --> 00:14:45,680
Speaker 1: that one, you had to pick up one million products.

264
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:50,560
Speaker 1: Amazon calls US leaderboard programs FC games for fulfillment centered games,

265
00:14:50,600 --> 00:14:53,480
Speaker 1: and it started testing it back in twenty seventeen, and

266
00:14:53,520 --> 00:14:56,280
Speaker 1: by twenty twenty one, it had expanded these games to

267
00:14:56,280 --> 00:15:00,360
Speaker 1: fulfillment centers in at least twenty states. If gamifying work

268
00:15:00,480 --> 00:15:02,720
Speaker 1: sounds weird to you, well yeah, it sounds weird to

269
00:15:02,800 --> 00:15:06,240
Speaker 1: me too, So to be fair, an Amazon spokesperson told

270
00:15:06,280 --> 00:15:10,040
Speaker 1: the magazine The Independent that quote, employees have told us

271
00:15:10,160 --> 00:15:13,560
Speaker 1: they enjoy having the option to join in these workstation games,

272
00:15:13,800 --> 00:15:16,920
Speaker 1: which are completely optional. They can switch in or out

273
00:15:16,920 --> 00:15:20,080
Speaker 1: of different games depending on their preference, can play anonymously,

274
00:15:20,400 --> 00:15:23,680
Speaker 1: or not play at all. The choice is theirs end quote.

275
00:15:24,760 --> 00:15:28,400
Speaker 1: So yeah, if my employer put a leaderboard up on

276
00:15:28,440 --> 00:15:30,560
Speaker 1: the wall, I'm not sure if I would feel like

277
00:15:30,600 --> 00:15:32,760
Speaker 1: it was actually completely optional.

278
00:15:33,880 --> 00:15:36,440
Speaker 2: The right spirit to play games, and that makes them

279
00:15:36,560 --> 00:15:40,800
Speaker 2: deeply fun instead of merely addictive, is a spirit of playfulness,

280
00:15:41,200 --> 00:15:43,640
Speaker 2: and that's the spirit that you might try on a

281
00:15:43,680 --> 00:15:46,080
Speaker 2: party game with your friend. But it sure isn't the

282
00:15:46,080 --> 00:15:49,640
Speaker 2: spirit of what happened. When you force your students or

283
00:15:49,720 --> 00:15:52,320
Speaker 2: workers under a leader board that they have no control

284
00:15:52,360 --> 00:15:54,480
Speaker 2: over and tell them that they're going to lose their

285
00:15:54,560 --> 00:15:57,720
Speaker 2: jobs or get promotions based on how they do on

286
00:15:57,760 --> 00:15:59,760
Speaker 2: this leaderboard, that is the opposite of the spirit of

287
00:15:59,760 --> 00:16:00,480
Speaker 2: play lifeless.

288
00:16:00,720 --> 00:16:02,720
Speaker 1: But that thing you said, I think that's really important, though,

289
00:16:02,720 --> 00:16:05,040
Speaker 1: that's a distinction that almost is really hard to make

290
00:16:05,120 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 1: because addictiveness looks like fun at first, because at first,

291
00:16:11,680 --> 00:16:14,480
Speaker 1: when you start, I mean, shoot, yeah, let's look at

292
00:16:14,480 --> 00:16:16,680
Speaker 1: one of those leader boards at you know, the factory

293
00:16:16,760 --> 00:16:20,440
Speaker 1: or whatever. Who moved the most boxes? It's kind of

294
00:16:20,520 --> 00:16:24,200
Speaker 1: fun to try to go up the leaderboard, right, And

295
00:16:24,240 --> 00:16:27,600
Speaker 1: there is a certain kind of person who single mindedly

296
00:16:27,680 --> 00:16:31,880
Speaker 1: will dedicate their entire life to moving up that leaderboard

297
00:16:31,920 --> 00:16:34,400
Speaker 1: for who moved the most boxes. But for the most

298
00:16:34,440 --> 00:16:37,640
Speaker 1: of us, it's something that you're kind of it kind

299
00:16:37,640 --> 00:16:39,080
Speaker 1: of feels like you're being tricked into doing it.

300
00:16:39,600 --> 00:16:42,520
Speaker 2: Yeah. One of the starting points for me trying to

301
00:16:42,680 --> 00:16:46,320
Speaker 2: figure all the stuff out was losing months of my

302
00:16:46,400 --> 00:16:51,680
Speaker 2: life to the computer game Civilization m CIF gruelingly addictive, Yeah,

303
00:16:51,720 --> 00:16:54,320
Speaker 2: and thinking I had fun, telling myself I had fun

304
00:16:54,400 --> 00:16:55,800
Speaker 2: until and I think a lot of people out of

305
00:16:55,840 --> 00:16:58,840
Speaker 2: this experience. You walk out and you're like, I've just

306
00:16:58,960 --> 00:17:00,760
Speaker 2: lost months of my life and I can't remember it,

307
00:17:00,760 --> 00:17:02,200
Speaker 2: and I feel bad.

308
00:17:03,640 --> 00:17:05,600
Speaker 1: So this kind of thing can happen in games too.

309
00:17:05,920 --> 00:17:09,119
Speaker 1: There's this hit of dopamine that becomes addictive, and it

310
00:17:09,200 --> 00:17:12,919
Speaker 1: manipulates you into continuing to play or to engage, and

311
00:17:12,960 --> 00:17:15,680
Speaker 1: it makes you start to believe that you really do

312
00:17:15,760 --> 00:17:17,920
Speaker 1: want whatever it is of the game or the app

313
00:17:18,040 --> 00:17:20,720
Speaker 1: or the leader board is making you work for that.

314
00:17:20,880 --> 00:17:24,040
Speaker 1: Right there, That is value capture and action.

315
00:17:24,720 --> 00:17:26,600
Speaker 2: So I actually end up thinking that the way to

316
00:17:26,600 --> 00:17:29,560
Speaker 2: think about it is that you are outsourcing your values

317
00:17:30,240 --> 00:17:33,320
Speaker 2: instead of deciding for yourself. You're letting like Mark Zuckerberg

318
00:17:33,800 --> 00:17:35,040
Speaker 2: set your values for you.

319
00:17:35,800 --> 00:17:38,400
Speaker 1: Even if you've managed to stay away from scrolling endlessly

320
00:17:38,480 --> 00:17:41,080
Speaker 1: on your phone, you've definitely been a victim of what,

321
00:17:41,240 --> 00:17:44,600
Speaker 1: for me, is probably one of the most insidious examples

322
00:17:44,640 --> 00:17:49,120
Speaker 1: of value capture the school system, or more specifically grades.

323
00:17:50,800 --> 00:17:53,119
Speaker 2: So there is a great paper called Making the Grade,

324
00:17:53,200 --> 00:17:56,679
Speaker 2: The History of the A to F marking scheme in

325
00:17:56,840 --> 00:17:59,560
Speaker 2: American Education that points out that we have plenty of

326
00:17:59,600 --> 00:18:03,640
Speaker 2: research that clear grades are not good for education. They

327
00:18:03,720 --> 00:18:08,600
Speaker 2: narrow students curiosity. They make students competitive instead of open minded.

328
00:18:08,920 --> 00:18:11,359
Speaker 2: They kind of like kill students interest in anything but

329
00:18:11,480 --> 00:18:13,439
Speaker 2: doing well in the test. We actually have known this

330
00:18:13,520 --> 00:18:17,520
Speaker 2: since the eighteen hundreds. The United States actually went off

331
00:18:17,800 --> 00:18:20,440
Speaker 2: numerical grading in the eighteen hundreds. This article will teach

332
00:18:20,440 --> 00:18:23,840
Speaker 2: you really, yes, okay, for these reasons, we knew we

333
00:18:23,920 --> 00:18:28,199
Speaker 2: had ample evidence that it didn't work for education. The

334
00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:31,760
Speaker 2: reason it came back was employer interest in having clear

335
00:18:31,840 --> 00:18:34,040
Speaker 2: certificates that would prove that someone could do the work,

336
00:18:34,240 --> 00:18:36,480
Speaker 2: so they could quickly hire someone that would be capable

337
00:18:36,480 --> 00:18:39,600
Speaker 2: of doing the work. So the grading system is a

338
00:18:39,680 --> 00:18:45,160
Speaker 2: system that embodies the interests of employers, not of students.

339
00:18:45,359 --> 00:18:48,960
Speaker 2: So my worry is if you become captured by GPA,

340
00:18:50,080 --> 00:18:53,520
Speaker 2: then you will be guiding yourself by a value system

341
00:18:53,560 --> 00:18:56,960
Speaker 2: that wasn't made by you for you, for your own

342
00:18:56,960 --> 00:18:59,000
Speaker 2: health and well being. But you'll be captured by an

343
00:18:59,000 --> 00:19:02,080
Speaker 2: evaluative system that was engineered from the ground up to

344
00:19:02,200 --> 00:19:06,119
Speaker 2: serve the purpose of employers who want to quickly hire

345
00:19:06,160 --> 00:19:10,040
Speaker 2: and fire people replaceably.

346
00:19:10,320 --> 00:19:12,960
Speaker 1: It's so interesting to say that because when I teach

347
00:19:13,080 --> 00:19:16,200
Speaker 1: college classes, basically every time I do it, I will

348
00:19:16,200 --> 00:19:19,639
Speaker 1: go up in the beginning of the session, I will say, listen,

349
00:19:19,880 --> 00:19:22,240
Speaker 1: I don't do grades. At the end of the semestery

350
00:19:22,280 --> 00:19:23,600
Speaker 1: tell me what you want. I'll give it to you.

351
00:19:23,640 --> 00:19:27,440
Speaker 1: I don't care. And you would think that students would

352
00:19:27,480 --> 00:19:30,080
Speaker 1: love this, And everybody I tell this too, says, oh, well,

353
00:19:30,119 --> 00:19:34,640
Speaker 1: they probably just ask for A's right. Everybody gets extra nervous.

354
00:19:35,480 --> 00:19:38,000
Speaker 1: And the more elite institutions that I teach at, the

355
00:19:38,040 --> 00:19:43,760
Speaker 1: more nervous they get about it, because it's like, wait, huh.

356
00:19:41,680 --> 00:19:43,080
Speaker 2: What do you mean.

357
00:19:43,119 --> 00:19:44,439
Speaker 1: I can just have an a like I don't really

358
00:19:44,520 --> 00:19:46,920
Speaker 1: understand what we're doing here. The thing that I'm trying

359
00:19:46,960 --> 00:19:49,119
Speaker 1: to do is say, hey, I want to take that

360
00:19:49,240 --> 00:19:54,320
Speaker 1: pressure off. But that actually it's not as successful as

361
00:19:54,359 --> 00:19:55,000
Speaker 1: you would think it is.

362
00:19:55,480 --> 00:20:00,440
Speaker 2: Yeah. So I have been trying to ungrade forever. And

363
00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:03,840
Speaker 2: I mean I actually literally teach in my intro ethics

364
00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:06,879
Speaker 2: class a unit called is grading Bullshit? We read a

365
00:20:06,880 --> 00:20:09,880
Speaker 2: famous philosophy favor from Harry Frankfurt called what is Bullshit?

366
00:20:10,440 --> 00:20:12,160
Speaker 2: And then I teach them this making the great stuff?

367
00:20:12,160 --> 00:20:14,919
Speaker 2: And I'm like, Okay, he's grading bullshit and they have

368
00:20:14,920 --> 00:20:18,000
Speaker 2: a lot to say about that. But I think one

369
00:20:18,040 --> 00:20:20,960
Speaker 2: thing that as educators we have to confront is the

370
00:20:21,040 --> 00:20:22,960
Speaker 2: fact that it would be one thing to have an

371
00:20:23,000 --> 00:20:26,480
Speaker 2: ungraded world and the other to ungrade your classroom where

372
00:20:26,600 --> 00:20:29,199
Speaker 2: the rest of the world wants grades and students have

373
00:20:29,240 --> 00:20:30,560
Speaker 2: been brought up to expect them.

374
00:20:31,600 --> 00:20:35,560
Speaker 1: This is another fundamental difference between a gamified system and

375
00:20:35,720 --> 00:20:39,000
Speaker 1: an actual game. In a game, you can choose and

376
00:20:39,119 --> 00:20:41,960
Speaker 1: tweak the game you're playing. Like I played a version

377
00:20:42,000 --> 00:20:44,240
Speaker 1: of soccer where nobody gets to use their hands, even

378
00:20:44,280 --> 00:20:46,879
Speaker 1: the goalies. It's more challenging and it's kind of fun.

379
00:20:47,280 --> 00:20:50,840
Speaker 1: In an actual game, players can come together and agree

380
00:20:50,840 --> 00:20:54,280
Speaker 1: to change something, but in real life that choice isn't

381
00:20:54,320 --> 00:20:54,959
Speaker 1: always up to you.

382
00:20:55,680 --> 00:20:59,280
Speaker 2: So the anthropologist Johann Husinga, who is one of the

383
00:20:59,320 --> 00:21:03,200
Speaker 2: early games, he has this book Homolludence not Homosopians, Homolludens.

384
00:21:03,240 --> 00:21:06,359
Speaker 2: We are the playing creature. He says that what games

385
00:21:06,359 --> 00:21:08,320
Speaker 2: are and what play is is something that occurs in

386
00:21:08,359 --> 00:21:12,280
Speaker 2: a magic circle. A magic circle is an isolated domain

387
00:21:12,320 --> 00:21:15,280
Speaker 2: of meaning where you enter into it, and the meanings

388
00:21:15,320 --> 00:21:18,280
Speaker 2: and reasons you do things change what he means, It's like,

389
00:21:18,320 --> 00:21:20,640
Speaker 2: you know, we might hate each other, but we're from

390
00:21:20,680 --> 00:21:23,240
Speaker 2: the same team with basketball. Suddenly it doesn't matter that

391
00:21:23,280 --> 00:21:25,600
Speaker 2: we hate each other. We're going to co operate, and

392
00:21:25,640 --> 00:21:27,720
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter if I love my spouse. If she's

393
00:21:27,720 --> 00:21:30,040
Speaker 2: on the opposite team, I'm going to block the pass.

394
00:21:30,600 --> 00:21:34,479
Speaker 2: But more importantly, they're disconnected from each other. So an

395
00:21:34,520 --> 00:21:38,359
Speaker 2: important thing about say, like a metric like GPA, you

396
00:21:38,400 --> 00:21:40,040
Speaker 2: don't have a lot of freedom. If I try to

397
00:21:40,080 --> 00:21:43,119
Speaker 2: take my class off of the GPA standard and like

398
00:21:43,240 --> 00:21:46,560
Speaker 2: not give letter grades, my students are screwed. Right. That

399
00:21:46,680 --> 00:21:49,840
Speaker 2: system is designed so that it's the point is that

400
00:21:49,880 --> 00:21:54,960
Speaker 2: everything is locked together. For games, there's no lock. It

401
00:21:55,000 --> 00:21:57,360
Speaker 2: doesn't matter if I don't like Mario and I want

402
00:21:57,359 --> 00:21:59,399
Speaker 2: to speed run it. I've created a different game with

403
00:21:59,440 --> 00:22:02,879
Speaker 2: an independent scoring system. So there's a freedom to manipulate

404
00:22:02,920 --> 00:22:06,320
Speaker 2: the scoring system for different reasons, which creates an ecosystem

405
00:22:06,720 --> 00:22:11,000
Speaker 2: of different experiences. You can house rule dungeons and dragons.

406
00:22:11,160 --> 00:22:14,680
Speaker 2: You can't house rule GPA. You can't house rule subscriber accounts.

407
00:22:14,760 --> 00:22:18,320
Speaker 2: You can't house rule KPIs. You cannot tweak them in

408
00:22:18,359 --> 00:22:22,080
Speaker 2: the light of some subtler. Beautiful good.

409
00:22:23,480 --> 00:22:26,280
Speaker 1: Okay, So a big problem with gamification is that the

410
00:22:26,320 --> 00:22:30,440
Speaker 1: scoring system isn't aligned with our actual values. So couldn't

411
00:22:30,480 --> 00:22:33,960
Speaker 1: we just fix that by changing the scoring system. Well,

412
00:22:34,119 --> 00:22:44,240
Speaker 1: it's not that easy. We get into why after the break. Okay,

413
00:22:44,359 --> 00:22:47,199
Speaker 1: so social media platforms are making us value likes and

414
00:22:47,280 --> 00:22:50,480
Speaker 1: follower counts. But what if they switched the incentive to

415
00:22:50,760 --> 00:22:52,880
Speaker 1: I don't know how many hugs you got last week,

416
00:22:52,960 --> 00:22:55,600
Speaker 1: like something you should actually care about, something more wholesome.

417
00:22:55,960 --> 00:22:59,200
Speaker 1: Couldn't we theoretically solve this problem of value capture by

418
00:22:59,359 --> 00:23:02,760
Speaker 1: just changing those knobs that were twisting teen Win says,

419
00:23:02,800 --> 00:23:04,240
Speaker 1: this probably won't work.

420
00:23:05,119 --> 00:23:06,800
Speaker 2: So sometimes when I talk about this stuff, I give

421
00:23:06,840 --> 00:23:08,679
Speaker 2: examples of bad metrics, and people want to be like,

422
00:23:08,680 --> 00:23:10,760
Speaker 2: oh my god, like those are bad, but let's just

423
00:23:10,760 --> 00:23:13,680
Speaker 2: get better ones. And I'm really interested in the possibility

424
00:23:13,680 --> 00:23:17,440
Speaker 2: that there are no metrics that would make good human values,

425
00:23:17,920 --> 00:23:23,280
Speaker 2: because there's something about bureaucratic metrics that's inimical to human values.

426
00:23:23,480 --> 00:23:26,800
Speaker 2: What the world of metrics pushes us towards is paying

427
00:23:26,840 --> 00:23:30,679
Speaker 2: attention to what's easy to count together and what we

428
00:23:30,720 --> 00:23:35,120
Speaker 2: can consistently count together, and not what we actually care about.

429
00:23:35,440 --> 00:23:39,879
Speaker 2: Gamification ties us to only targeting the things that are

430
00:23:39,920 --> 00:23:43,240
Speaker 2: easy to count together. It ties us to maxing out

431
00:23:43,240 --> 00:23:47,359
Speaker 2: engagement hours in say, making our TV programs and not

432
00:23:47,600 --> 00:23:51,399
Speaker 2: like making good art. It ties us to like steps

433
00:23:51,440 --> 00:23:56,719
Speaker 2: instead of a rich emotional experience with a weird trail

434
00:23:56,920 --> 00:23:57,600
Speaker 2: that you are on.

435
00:23:58,000 --> 00:24:00,679
Speaker 1: What ten Win is arguing is that by definition of

436
00:24:00,680 --> 00:24:03,080
Speaker 1: being able to score something, to have a simple enough

437
00:24:03,119 --> 00:24:05,560
Speaker 1: metric to track that we have to lose some of

438
00:24:05,600 --> 00:24:09,000
Speaker 1: the complexity of real life, and that will always lead

439
00:24:09,040 --> 00:24:11,679
Speaker 1: to a flattening of your experience of being a human

440
00:24:12,040 --> 00:24:15,480
Speaker 1: and losing sight of how complicated real life actually is.

441
00:24:16,280 --> 00:24:18,600
Speaker 2: The first place I started studying this was in what

442
00:24:18,680 --> 00:24:22,040
Speaker 2: are called public transparency metrics, like metrics that are trying

443
00:24:22,040 --> 00:24:25,720
Speaker 2: to take some institution that's kind of private and insular

444
00:24:25,720 --> 00:24:28,399
Speaker 2: and elite and expose it to get rid of bias

445
00:24:28,440 --> 00:24:30,600
Speaker 2: and corruption. I was brought up to think, and I

446
00:24:30,640 --> 00:24:33,440
Speaker 2: still halfway think that transparency is great. It does get

447
00:24:33,520 --> 00:24:36,840
Speaker 2: rid of bias and corruption. But there's another effect. So

448
00:24:37,119 --> 00:24:39,600
Speaker 2: charity navigators are really good case. So for a long

449
00:24:39,640 --> 00:24:43,680
Speaker 2: time I guided my charitable giving using Charity Navigator, which

450
00:24:43,720 --> 00:24:48,000
Speaker 2: was a nonprofit watchdog that rated charities on how good

451
00:24:48,040 --> 00:24:50,720
Speaker 2: they were, how did they count good. Turns out, they

452
00:24:50,800 --> 00:24:52,720
Speaker 2: counted good for a really long time in terms of

453
00:24:52,720 --> 00:24:56,119
Speaker 2: something called a throughput metric. The throughput metric was the

454
00:24:56,240 --> 00:24:59,159
Speaker 2: ratio of how many donations were sent to the nonprofit

455
00:24:59,520 --> 00:25:01,879
Speaker 2: and how much went out the other end. So the

456
00:25:01,920 --> 00:25:05,040
Speaker 2: more efficient the charity, the better it was. An efficiency

457
00:25:05,080 --> 00:25:08,440
Speaker 2: meant most of the donations went out and were sent

458
00:25:08,520 --> 00:25:11,280
Speaker 2: out as resources on the other end. What this actually

459
00:25:11,320 --> 00:25:15,560
Speaker 2: does is it forces nonprofits to compete for how little

460
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:20,439
Speaker 2: internal spending they do, so any internal spending counts as waste,

461
00:25:20,640 --> 00:25:23,359
Speaker 2: which means, for example, if you're trying to build better

462
00:25:23,400 --> 00:25:26,359
Speaker 2: houses and you hire an expert and housing construction, or

463
00:25:26,400 --> 00:25:29,280
Speaker 2: you hire an expert in the local environment, that count

464
00:25:29,400 --> 00:25:32,320
Speaker 2: is waste and it makes your through pet metric fall.

465
00:25:32,920 --> 00:25:36,880
Speaker 2: It's a terrible measure, but it looks good from the outside,

466
00:25:37,359 --> 00:25:41,000
Speaker 2: and it looks objective because it looks at accounting, which

467
00:25:41,040 --> 00:25:43,320
Speaker 2: is something that everyone can assess in the same way,

468
00:25:43,840 --> 00:25:47,919
Speaker 2: and it ignores the actual on the ground efficacy of

469
00:25:48,320 --> 00:25:52,639
Speaker 2: building better housing, improving ecosystems, because those things are really

470
00:25:52,720 --> 00:25:56,760
Speaker 2: complicated and expert matters to assess, and accounting is something

471
00:25:56,800 --> 00:26:00,400
Speaker 2: that looks pretty much the same across nonprofits. One way

472
00:26:00,440 --> 00:26:03,800
Speaker 2: to put it is, I think there's a lot of

473
00:26:03,880 --> 00:26:07,480
Speaker 2: life that has a structure where a lot of what

474
00:26:07,520 --> 00:26:12,119
Speaker 2: we're doing has this natural, open ended value to it.

475
00:26:12,400 --> 00:26:16,120
Speaker 2: And then we enter into official environments that said, no, no, right,

476
00:26:16,480 --> 00:26:20,480
Speaker 2: here's the rubric, here's your key performance indicators, here's your

477
00:26:20,480 --> 00:26:23,080
Speaker 2: subscriber accounts or follower accounts. And then we suddenly get

478
00:26:23,119 --> 00:26:26,520
Speaker 2: a mechanical thing that is ultra clear that everyone can

479
00:26:26,600 --> 00:26:27,120
Speaker 2: key in on.

480
00:26:28,280 --> 00:26:31,919
Speaker 1: Is there a way that gamification can be used actually

481
00:26:31,960 --> 00:26:34,359
Speaker 1: for good? Basically, I'm asking if his gamification is all

482
00:26:34,400 --> 00:26:36,240
Speaker 1: bad because it feels like it's all bad right now.

483
00:26:36,680 --> 00:26:38,080
Speaker 1: It feels like it's all manipulative.

484
00:26:38,480 --> 00:26:42,240
Speaker 2: So here's a great way to interact with scoring systems

485
00:26:42,240 --> 00:26:45,280
Speaker 2: and with gamifications. You try them on and you see

486
00:26:45,320 --> 00:26:47,639
Speaker 2: if they work for you, and if they don't, you

487
00:26:47,800 --> 00:26:50,840
Speaker 2: change them. So a lot of people use fitbit well,

488
00:26:50,960 --> 00:26:53,359
Speaker 2: I think they start it and it helps them and

489
00:26:53,400 --> 00:26:55,800
Speaker 2: they feel good about it. But the crucial thing I

490
00:26:55,800 --> 00:26:57,919
Speaker 2: mean is to check in and keep asking is it

491
00:26:57,960 --> 00:27:00,399
Speaker 2: still making me feel good? Is it still making me healthy?

492
00:27:00,600 --> 00:27:02,439
Speaker 2: Is it still giving me a joy in life? And

493
00:27:02,440 --> 00:27:05,720
Speaker 2: it doesn't you change it? Like rock climbing, the scoring

494
00:27:05,720 --> 00:27:07,480
Speaker 2: system of rock climbing really helped me at first. It

495
00:27:07,520 --> 00:27:10,280
Speaker 2: pushes you to do more difficult things, and that's what

496
00:27:10,560 --> 00:27:14,000
Speaker 2: forced me to understand like the subtleties of my body.

497
00:27:14,359 --> 00:27:16,560
Speaker 2: And for the first like five or six or seven years,

498
00:27:16,600 --> 00:27:19,600
Speaker 2: the standard given scoring system of rock climbing worked great

499
00:27:19,640 --> 00:27:21,760
Speaker 2: for me. And then I got older and I became

500
00:27:21,760 --> 00:27:24,320
Speaker 2: a parent, and I didn't progress. It was impossible for

501
00:27:24,359 --> 00:27:27,639
Speaker 2: you progress and more difficult climbs were just frustrating, and

502
00:27:27,680 --> 00:27:32,840
Speaker 2: so I changed to trying to climb more elegantly. The

503
00:27:32,920 --> 00:27:36,439
Speaker 2: problem here is not just that scoring systems are clear,

504
00:27:37,040 --> 00:27:42,280
Speaker 2: but that they are given from some alien, distant personage

505
00:27:42,359 --> 00:27:45,959
Speaker 2: or institution for some alien or distant reason. Then if

506
00:27:46,000 --> 00:27:51,080
Speaker 2: you keep picking and modding and changing the scoring systems

507
00:27:51,520 --> 00:27:55,520
Speaker 2: to suit yourself or your particular community, that's the opposite

508
00:27:55,960 --> 00:27:58,760
Speaker 2: of large scale bureaucratic gamification.

509
00:27:59,400 --> 00:28:01,199
Speaker 1: Well it seems like a hard to do that, right, I

510
00:28:01,200 --> 00:28:05,000
Speaker 1: mean coming back to you know, say social media, right,

511
00:28:05,200 --> 00:28:09,399
Speaker 1: something that exists now, like, for example, TikTok. TikTok was

512
00:28:09,400 --> 00:28:11,960
Speaker 1: the first thing that I saw that in the app

513
00:28:12,400 --> 00:28:15,200
Speaker 1: it would tell you, hey, here's how to make your

514
00:28:15,400 --> 00:28:18,440
Speaker 1: posts more popular, and then all the other ones started

515
00:28:18,440 --> 00:28:21,399
Speaker 1: to do them, and so we've gotten really used to

516
00:28:21,680 --> 00:28:24,080
Speaker 1: like the point of taking a picture or the point

517
00:28:24,080 --> 00:28:29,120
Speaker 1: of taking a short video is getting numbers to go up. Yeah, exactly,

518
00:28:29,240 --> 00:28:30,800
Speaker 1: how do we get out of that? Like, is there

519
00:28:30,840 --> 00:28:33,400
Speaker 1: a way out of that? Is that an individual thing?

520
00:28:33,480 --> 00:28:35,439
Speaker 1: Is that a societal level thing? How do you get

521
00:28:35,480 --> 00:28:35,879
Speaker 1: out of that?

522
00:28:36,520 --> 00:28:38,440
Speaker 2: Give and I've been talking about things so far today

523
00:28:38,480 --> 00:28:41,720
Speaker 2: there's like a bad lesson and the bad lesson, the

524
00:28:41,800 --> 00:28:44,040
Speaker 2: lesson I don't want people to hear is like, it's

525
00:28:44,080 --> 00:28:47,400
Speaker 2: all on you. Just about grit man, Just be playful

526
00:28:47,480 --> 00:28:49,560
Speaker 2: and you'll be fine. And I actually think it's like,

527
00:28:49,560 --> 00:28:54,440
Speaker 2: you know, some structures make life deeply and more easily playful,

528
00:28:54,440 --> 00:28:59,960
Speaker 2: and other structures make it really hard. Push and incentivize

529
00:29:00,080 --> 00:29:04,200
Speaker 2: and unify these external presentations of value. Example, is exactly

530
00:29:04,240 --> 00:29:06,440
Speaker 2: the point. It's a very different spirit to walk into

531
00:29:06,440 --> 00:29:08,360
Speaker 2: a game store and be like, hey, I could play anything,

532
00:29:08,400 --> 00:29:10,720
Speaker 2: I could walk away from everything. The structure of social

533
00:29:10,720 --> 00:29:12,360
Speaker 2: media and the structure of grades and the structure of

534
00:29:12,400 --> 00:29:15,520
Speaker 2: key performance indicators is the opposite. It makes a world

535
00:29:15,720 --> 00:29:19,920
Speaker 2: that is inimical to freedom. It makes a world that's

536
00:29:19,960 --> 00:29:22,680
Speaker 2: constantly pressing on us and telling us like, ooh, just

537
00:29:22,720 --> 00:29:24,600
Speaker 2: care about this little thing and you won't have to worry.

538
00:29:24,640 --> 00:29:26,640
Speaker 2: You'll be able to communicate, easy to lead to everyone

539
00:29:26,680 --> 00:29:30,160
Speaker 2: you'll be completely comprehensible, like you'll be unified. Right. The

540
00:29:30,200 --> 00:29:33,560
Speaker 2: world is constantly pushing and I'm like, you can take steps,

541
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:42,040
Speaker 2: but it's hard because of the perfasiveness of these presentations. Look,

542
00:29:42,120 --> 00:29:44,120
Speaker 2: there are things that we can do and things that

543
00:29:44,160 --> 00:29:47,120
Speaker 2: we can't do. Like, for example, I'm also a teacher,

544
00:29:47,320 --> 00:29:49,720
Speaker 2: and in the college classes that I teach, I tell

545
00:29:49,720 --> 00:29:52,240
Speaker 2: the students don't worry about the grades. If you want

546
00:29:52,240 --> 00:29:54,000
Speaker 2: an A, I'll give you an A. It doesn't matter

547
00:29:54,040 --> 00:29:56,960
Speaker 2: to me. But that's just one class out of the

548
00:29:57,000 --> 00:29:59,440
Speaker 2: five classes that a student might be taken that semester.

549
00:30:00,040 --> 00:30:02,160
Speaker 2: So I can do whatever I want in my little

550
00:30:02,200 --> 00:30:05,720
Speaker 2: corner of the classroom, but I'm not fundamentally changing the system.

551
00:30:06,280 --> 00:30:09,000
Speaker 2: And you can decide to post a selfie on Instagram

552
00:30:09,040 --> 00:30:11,560
Speaker 2: and not look at the likes or the comments that follows,

553
00:30:11,920 --> 00:30:14,520
Speaker 2: but that doesn't stop other people from looking at your

554
00:30:14,600 --> 00:30:18,000
Speaker 2: post and judging how popular or pretty or interesting you are,

555
00:30:18,120 --> 00:30:20,640
Speaker 2: just based on those dumb little numbers under the picture.

556
00:30:21,480 --> 00:30:23,600
Speaker 2: These are the systems that have been put into place,

557
00:30:23,680 --> 00:30:27,200
Speaker 2: however arbitrary they might be by people with more money

558
00:30:27,360 --> 00:30:30,440
Speaker 2: and more power than you or me. But I do

559
00:30:30,480 --> 00:30:33,280
Speaker 2: feel like being aware that these systems are there and

560
00:30:33,320 --> 00:30:35,880
Speaker 2: that they don't always have your best interest.

561
00:30:35,560 --> 00:30:38,560
Speaker 1: At heart is helpful. I mean, this conversation definitely helped me.

562
00:30:39,200 --> 00:30:42,000
Speaker 1: So I'm not saying don't use a fitness tracker, don't

563
00:30:42,080 --> 00:30:45,320
Speaker 1: use a language learning app or whatever, but being aware

564
00:30:45,320 --> 00:30:47,840
Speaker 1: of your ultimate goal when you start using those apps

565
00:30:48,360 --> 00:30:51,200
Speaker 1: might help prevent the app from tricking you into playing

566
00:30:51,200 --> 00:30:52,920
Speaker 1: a game you never wanted to play.

567
00:30:54,040 --> 00:30:58,719
Speaker 2: Word a moment where I see the two extremes getting

568
00:30:58,720 --> 00:31:02,840
Speaker 2: more extreme. On the one hand, I see the deeper

569
00:31:02,880 --> 00:31:08,160
Speaker 2: and greater intrusiveness of KPIs and metrics, and on the

570
00:31:08,200 --> 00:31:12,200
Speaker 2: other hand, I see the flourishing of these wild, weird

571
00:31:12,240 --> 00:31:15,680
Speaker 2: ass indie games And I don't know. This is the

572
00:31:15,680 --> 00:31:19,040
Speaker 2: fight we're participating in. A like you get to be

573
00:31:19,120 --> 00:31:25,080
Speaker 2: part of this titanic struggle between the most beautiful and

574
00:31:25,160 --> 00:31:29,080
Speaker 2: the most horrible use of scoring systems to bend Soul's.

575
00:31:28,480 --> 00:31:30,200
Speaker 1: Great everybody's playing the game.

576
00:31:30,560 --> 00:31:33,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, I hope we win. I hope we do too.

577
00:31:37,600 --> 00:31:41,040
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for listening to another episode kill Switch.

578
00:31:41,120 --> 00:31:42,680
Speaker 1: If you want to talk to us, you can email

579
00:31:42,760 --> 00:31:46,440
Speaker 1: us at kill Switch at Kaleidoscope dot NYC, or if

580
00:31:46,480 --> 00:31:48,600
Speaker 1: you want to follow us, on Instagram or at kill

581
00:31:48,680 --> 00:31:51,960
Speaker 1: Switch Pod and while you still got your podcast open,

582
00:31:52,160 --> 00:31:54,520
Speaker 1: maybe leave us a review. It helps other people find

583
00:31:54,560 --> 00:31:57,440
Speaker 1: the show, which helps us keep doing our thing. Kill

584
00:31:57,440 --> 00:32:01,320
Speaker 1: Switch is hosted by Me Dexter Thomas, produced by Sena Ozaki,

585
00:32:01,680 --> 00:32:05,000
Speaker 1: darlv Potts and Julia Nutter. Our theme song is by

586
00:32:05,040 --> 00:32:07,880
Speaker 1: me and Kyle Murdoch, and Kyle also mixed the show.

587
00:32:08,240 --> 00:32:12,320
Speaker 1: From Kaleidoscope. Our executive producers are Oswa Lashin, Mangesh Hajigador,

588
00:32:12,680 --> 00:32:16,320
Speaker 1: and Kate Osborne. From iHeart, our executive producers are Katrina

589
00:32:16,360 --> 00:32:23,800
Speaker 1: Norbl and Nikki E. Tor Catch On the next One, Goodbye,