Persistence Can Be Annoying

OK, so yesterday I'm on the metro, and this man sits next to me and immediately strikes up an inquisitive conversation. He was very curious, asking me question after question. He was very persistent. Did I find this annoying? Not really, he was a fellow Southerner excited to be in the nation's capital so I sort of welcomed the friendly small talk that you don't find so much here in D.C. However, would most metro riders have found this annoying? My guess is probably. To some he may have been an aggravation in the midst of their busy day, but this guy wasn't really doing anything wrong. I wasn't being violated by this persistent conversation. I was just being talked to whether I invited the conversation or not.

This 3 minute conversation came to mind when I was thinking about another one of Fogg's "unique ethical concerns related to persuasive technology," the idea that the persistence of computers creates an ethical concern. I think this is more a concern of annoyance than of ethics. For instance, a pop-up screen is "in your face," but as the user, you can use pop-up blockers or you can simply choose not to click on or even read the advertisement. The same goes for unsolicited e-mails that clog your inbox. Like regular junk mail, they are aggravating, but they are in no way a violation of your ethical rights. I argue that the user is not being violated by a computer's proactive persistence but rather, just being annoyed.