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

581–590 of 619 posts

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#581

Post by colejohnson66 »

klyrs wrote: post #339
colejohnson66 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I dunno, folks might get salty if google's bots used misleading useragents. And it just escalates the existing cat&mouse game

Google already explicitly discourages “cloaking”.[0] They define it as:

> Cloaking refers to the practice of presenting different content or URLs to human users and search engines. Cloaking is considered a violation of Google's Webmaster Guidelines because it provides our users with different results than they expected.

You’d think they’d do something about it. Maybe it’s because Reddit doesn’t cloak necessarily, but when it straight up refuses to show without the app (sometimes), I’d call that cloaking (in spirit). News sites throwing up paywalls would fit that too.

[0]: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/advanced/guideline...

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#582

Post by XorNot »

norvvryo wrote: post #566
Ntrails wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> remove the requirement for seatbelts since "if it goes down, they're all dead anyway." I mean, he's got a point here. Surely if we actually wanted plane passengers to survive crashes they'd have something more substantial than lap belts? I'd have thought, as a simple laymen, facing the seats backwards would make any impact far more survivable than crouching in the insane way that the "safety pamphlet" suggests?

Airliner seatbelts primarily exist to restrain passengers during turbulence.

This is the correct answer. Lap belts are there because under unexpected conditions planes can and have[1] suddenly hit turbulence pockets where they plummet 10 or so meters in an instant. The effect is anyone unbuckled gets slammed into the ceiling.

It's why if you're seated, it's recommended to be buckled in - the difference between one person slamming into the ceiling and 300 is pretty substantial.

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=7391144&page=1

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#583

Post by greenshackle2 »

commoner wrote: post #336
greenshackle2 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Firefox doing it to prevent Facebook (and Instagram) from scraping your history. If you're not on Firefox, then I don't know.

Is there an announcement, help page, or issue/commit explaining this feature?

There's this:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-CA/firefox/facebookcontainer/

I'm not sure if it's built into some versions now?

It does it on my Windows computer but not my Linux laptop, and I don't remember explicitly installing this extension on either.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#585

Post by kazinator »

The Royal Bank of Canada ("RBC") perpetrated a FYP last summer.

Users were suddenly denied access to online banking, unless they agreed to switch all statement reporting from paper to electronic. This was a condition prior to being allowed to continue with the login; the option was given to refuse, but it was made clear that this choice meant losing access to online banking.

But, don't worry, the UI flow assured the user: once you log in you can set your statement reporting preferences.

Of course, it didn't show you what the current preferences are or save them anywhere!

I had just one or two things for which I had been getting paper statements, all else being electronic. I could not remember exactly which and since they didn't remember for me, I did the simplest thing and switched every single item to snail-mail paper statements.

Getting the user to resent you (even more) isn't how you bring about cooperation.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#586

Post by VRay »

dont__panic wrote: post #443
VRay wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good news, my friend, you can see their sentiment right here in this very thread! Scroll up or down and feast your eyes. My personal story: When I interviewed for a job at Amazon many years ago, all the recruiter e-mail kept going into my trash. I finally realized that I'd just directed *@amazon.com into my trash years earlier because they kept filling my inbox with so much useless bullshit, and I'd always hated the…

Ah, the old "destroy it from the inside" strategy. Except instead of actively fighting anything, you recognize that rotting the company from the inside out with apathy while collecting the beefiest paycheck possible is your strongest weapon. Bold strategy. Though I have to wonder if weaponizing your career in that way has dangerous implications for your self-esteem?

haha, where'd you get the idea that I'm fighting back?

No, my friend, I put on my jackboots and my company logo t-shirt and give 100% every day

Really, people benefit when I rob them of their privacy

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#587

Post by AstralStorm »

nvarsj wrote: post #556
XorNot wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how does this explain why Windows 10, which I have paid like $150 for per license, is now infested with ads, tracking and online presence - and close to impossible to buy without that. They aren't even trying to put a $ figure on what they think it's worth - because they can't be stopped from doing it. There is no implied agreement, it's exactly as stated.

Or my $1600 LG OLED which takes screen captures by default and sends them to ad tracking cloud servers.

Get one from EU (or with EU firmware) and it does not by default. Good side effect of GDPR.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#588

Post by yellowapple »

ygra wrote: post #555
l33t2328 wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of windows is infested with ads?

Most of those are manageable or can be disabled, but it can become annoying: - Start Menu showing suggested apps (the infamous Candy Crush) - Task bar shown weather and news - Lock screen sometimes showing ads - Sometimes, with updates, new things are installed that auto-launch and prompt you to, e.g., buy an Office subscription.

Don't forget:

- Constantly nagging about using browsers other than Edge

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#589

Post by culopatin »

XorNot wrote: post #428
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…

So how does this explain why Windows 10, which I have paid like $150 for per license, is now infested with ads, tracking and online presence - and close to impossible to buy without that. They aren't even trying to put a $ figure on what they think it's worth - because they can't be stopped from doing it. There is no implied agreement, it's exactly as stated.

The company you purchased from decided to do it that way. If you don’t agree just don’t buy into it, or create a competitor. Did the license you bought said it would have no ads?

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#590

Post by yellowapple »

SilasX wrote: post #425
bserge wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The back button is broken, too. Was it that hard to bring you back to the comment you were reading when you clicked the link? Guess so.

In fairness, I see that on a lot of sites now and I almost want to say that's something browsers should be fixing. "Back" should take me to the exact page state, almost as if I had been following every page in a new tab (which is what they recommend now if you want to preserve where you were). It should be instant. But on most sites it hasn't been for a while.

> which is what they recommend now if you want to preserve where you were

And which becomes more difficult when sites break middle-clicking and other shortcuts to open links in new tabs, or when the "links" ain't actually links but just something on which they tack on an onClick() and run a bunch of JS to reinvent the concept of a link.

Post reply on HN