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

411–420 of 619 posts

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#411

Post by EamonnMR »

dheera wrote: post #236
Flott wrote: post #80

Fuck you patterns are everywhere on the web nowaday. Some of the most annoying to me: Twitch trying to discourage the use of the embedded player/non official players (like VLC) by replacing the content by a fullscreen purple picture asking you to watch on twitch.tv. Reddit trying to force mobile user to use the reddit app as soon as the content is marked NSFW. Instagram forcing me to login to view pictures. Twitter a…

Another one is the "can I help you" chat box that pops up. Intercom and the likes. Thinking about making a Chrome plugin that intentionally asks some nonsense questions programmatically in the background to waste their time and disincentivize that behavior. (To be clear, I love having chat channels for sales and support, just NOT unsolicited "Can I help you" popups.)

That just drives them toward using bots instead of humans.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#412

Post by [deleted] »

andai wrote: post #127
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

Kinda offtopic but Instagram's ads changed my attitude towards ads, and my attitude towards Facebook's creepy level of insight into my life and personality. If they have that data anyway -- and hundreds of companies do -- I might as well benefit from it, and Instagram's ads were the first ones that I actually found interesting. First of all, it was obvious when something was an ad. Second, they weren't intrusive or o…

[deleted]

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#413

Post by tbrock »

dheera wrote: post #229
tbrock wrote: post #137

Im not sure why this person would expect to see the content while logged out. Shrug. Its part of a social network, if everyone was lurking it would just be a bunch of creepers. The product shows who viewed a post/story/reel etc and can't do that if you arent logged in.

If so they should not even show the page to begin with. I'd be fine with that. (It's an intentionally public page about cat pictures, by the way, so it wouldn't be creepy for anonymous internet users to look at. It's only private Instagram pages that would be creepy in that sense.) Letting you browse public content for 5 seconds before asking you log in is a "fuck you" pattern.

Thats just advertising! I dont work at facebook but i also wasnt born yesterday. Give people a taste so they want to sign up. That doesn't make them evil any more than a movie trailer makes hollywood evil.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#414

Post by nine_k »

NieDzejkob wrote: post #398
nine_k wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go an and run a site that serves massive amounts of cat pictures for peanuts! Well, yes, serving static HTML is easy. Serving images is kind of not hard either, because you have free unlimited traffic, don't you? Some hosting plans offer it. They just limit the egress bandwidth. So maybe you need a few more servers to cope with it, just like $50 a pop. You're not gonna need any CDN, people further away from your DC w…

> Backblaze has no redundancy. That does not seem to be the case. https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217667468-B2-Se...

Indeed. They have redundancy within a DC, like you would expect from a NAS or SAN.

They don't have the cross-DC redundancy like S3 does. If a DC goes offline, so does your data.

I'm updating my comment.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#415

Post by stana »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

There seem to be many non tech savvy people who were shocked by docos like Social Dilemma and don't understand they are the product. They think they are 'just looking at cats'. Maybe these companies should clearly display on their front page they in personal data collection and targeted advertising business.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#416

Post by CameronNemo »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #207
andai wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda offtopic but Instagram's ads changed my attitude towards ads, and my attitude towards Facebook's creepy level of insight into my life and personality. If they have that data anyway -- and hundreds of companies do -- I might as well benefit from it, and Instagram's ads were the first ones that I actually found interesting. First of all, it was obvious when something was an ad. Second, they weren't intrusive or o…

Personally, I don't particularly care if companies have my data. However, I vehemently don't want them to use it for algorithmic recommendations—including ads—because it puts me in a filter bubble. All these technology companies are making assumptions about the type of person I am, and then molding me into that person. I can't learn about topics I don't see, so if the tech giants are convinced I like technology and c…

Help! I'm stuck in a local maxima and I can't tell how to escape!

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#417

Post by sk0g »

hermitdev wrote: post #400
judge2020 wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe? I'm not a lawyer and I would be surprised if they consulted one before implementing that feature. But unless the license for the file limits access it seems like they're just acting as an almost-proxy for these images, and not misrepresenting their ownership over them.

I'm not a lawyer, either, and have an honest question: how would a download of the image to cache it differ than a download to view it? They're performing the same action (downloading the bits). But, one stores it for later download by others, the second displays it (and maybe gets cached locally in a browser cache, making it look sort of like the first case...). Does intent matter? Is there an implied protection in…

Well I believe it's a difference of redirection vs redistribution.

Say you're talking to someone who can teleport instantly across the globe. If you tell him where he can see the Mona Lisa, that's OK. If you grab the Mona Lisa and wave it in his face, that is very un-OK.

Before someone replies with the "but digital items can be copied, it's not stealing", that's the argument most piracy enabling forums and websites are able to get away with. If you host, EG, Nintendo ROMs on your website, you'll get shut down quickly. If you just save links (URL or Magnet), you might get a DMCA for a specific item maybe, but won't get shut down entirely, probably.

As always, there are a lots of exceptions and alternative interpretations though.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#418

Post by nine_k »

eyelovewe wrote: post #404
nine_k wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go an and run a site that serves massive amounts of cat pictures for peanuts! Well, yes, serving static HTML is easy. Serving images is kind of not hard either, because you have free unlimited traffic, don't you? Some hosting plans offer it. They just limit the egress bandwidth. So maybe you need a few more servers to cope with it, just like $50 a pop. You're not gonna need any CDN, people further away from your DC w…

Sounds like overkill, mate. I’ll go with your comments parent. Maybe 5 peanuts. In all seriousness, I’ll agree on cdn at 20 a month plus 3 @ 15 dollar nodes running out app and db, let’s go multimaster with a local db node on each app server, screw the c go for a and p, and yeah a single haproxy hardware thread, ha, so make that 2 single core nodes 1gb will do fine for 300k connections per second, um you mentioned st…

Indeed, serving is the easy part, once it's set up. Going offline when the DC goes offline can be completely acceptable.

It's the picture intake pipeline that eats most of the resources. If you only want to serve the same collection, or a collection you personally increase by 1-2 cats a day, then it's fine.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#419

Post by caf »

scythmic_waves wrote: post #366
caf wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest the Lucy pattern (as in the football running gag from Peanuts).

Oh, good reference! I like "Peanuts Pattern" myself.

Somehow Charles M. Schulz managed to perfectly capture the feeling of following a pinterest link from a search result, half a century before pinterest existed.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#420

Post by greedo »

user123456780 wrote: post #299
e12e wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical infrastructure and staffing so you can sit at home and spend your time looking at cats for free? No, they have your attention and they're going to connect you to organizations who will pay for it. "The infrastructure" to share cat pictures cost peanuts. It's the addictive dark patterns and montezation/tracking that costs millions. That's the irony.

> "The infrastructure" to share cat pictures cost peanuts lol at this. Go setup that infrastructure and see how far you get for peanuts.

Considering that pof.com used to run on a single server and handled more dating traffic than all of its competitors combined, you can go pretty damn far for peanuts.
Post reply on HN