Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 'Fuck You' Pattern

cedwards.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 619 posts

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#281

Post by seanp2k2 »

klyrs wrote: post #13

I love instagram. It's the best social media site. Last time I checked, I couldn't even make an account from my desktop computer. I'm not gonna even try to install their app on my G-free phone. When a friends sends me a link to Instagram, I know that I don't need to click on it -- the thumbnail contains all the information that I'd ever see without creating an account. When news articles consist of a bunch of embedde…

Also, it’s 2021 and their iPad app is just the non-iPad app where it’s just a scaled portrait-only version of the iOS app. Do they not have the resources to do a proper iPad app?

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#282

Post by colejohnson66 »

klyrs wrote: post #67
tgtweak wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinterest and Reddit are not better these days. The amount of things you can view on reddit on your phone without creating an account or installing the app is dwindling daily. Every time my wife sends me a Pinterest link I just ask her to screenshot it as I can't see shit on the default mobile page. I don't even know why Google continues to allow them in the results when there is clear-cut policies around showing som…

> Ironically, a good workaround is setting your user agent to the Googlebot and suddenly all those modal/nag screens disappear. This is hilarious and makes so much sense. God, the internet is broken

Does Google not check for this at all? They could easily spoof their User-Agent to see if sites lie about what they show.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#284

Post by seanp2k2 »

klyrs wrote: post #67
tgtweak wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinterest and Reddit are not better these days. The amount of things you can view on reddit on your phone without creating an account or installing the app is dwindling daily. Every time my wife sends me a Pinterest link I just ask her to screenshot it as I can't see shit on the default mobile page. I don't even know why Google continues to allow them in the results when there is clear-cut policies around showing som…

> Ironically, a good workaround is setting your user agent to the Googlebot and suddenly all those modal/nag screens disappear. This is hilarious and makes so much sense. God, the internet is broken

How are they not getting absolutely destroyed by the Google search algos, since that’s the definition of cloaking: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/advanced/guideline...

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#285

Post by tonymet »

It’s a cynical way to interpret it . The desktop experience is only 30% of mobile. Brand perception is tarnished if people use the reduced experience .

Think of web as a preview experience and mobile is the complete product.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#286

Post by Traster »

Groxx wrote: post #247
turtletontine wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... but if you can't collect data on them, you can't target ads to them or sell their data elsewhere, and therefore they're worth nothing to you. At the end of the day every company wants to make money, or will be bought out by cutthroats who think it's all there is, and this kind of thinking will take hold. Users you can't profit from = leeches.

You can still collect (a lot) more information than classical advertising in print or on TV gets, and that seems to work alright.

Actually I think it's the opposite - online advertising is so ineffective all this micro-targetting is the minimum required to persuade people to throw their money away. In reality how do I target someone in New York? I buy an ad in the NYT.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#288

Post by seanp2k2 »

Bilters wrote: post #184
EamonnMR wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinterest is by the far the worst because it takes content from the rest of the world and strips away all context. It's the anti-wikipedia, an information black hole.

Whenever I put a google search down, and see one page of Pinterest on there I immediately go back to the search box and go for; “-site:pinterest.*”. I absolutely hate that site with a passion.

Even though I have the app and an account, I still despise using it. They break things like zoom and saving images. Clicking on something interesting takes you to…a site that doesn’t actually have that.

I truly don’t understand how Pinterest is so popular when it’s also so awful. Tumblr was so much better until Verizon destroyed it with management incompetence.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#289

Post by swyx »

Linkedin has one of these too. Displays your full information to Google to index you, but if a human user visits, up comes the login wall.

F you for treating bots better than humans, linkedin.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#290

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

I want plug-in which lets users highlight content on a page and mark it as "not malicious". It would use a CTPH algorithm to call out the non malicious bits from their context (same tech that virus scanners use). I call these annotations "brushstrokes".

Other users could "follow" my brushstrokes, so when they land on the page, instead of implicitly running whatever code it finds there it just fetches the known-non-malicious parts. I.e. the cat pictures.

I'd totally pay $5/month if $4 of it went to people who are annotating the web in this way. You could get paid in accordance with how popular and trustworthy your brushstrokes are, and together we can fix the web.

I guess the goal would be UURL's, where the both the reference and the referent are uniform--rather than a uniform reference to a who-knows-what-this-site-will-do referent.

Post reply on HN