Live data from Hacker News

A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

minimizedistraction.com

181–190 of 285 posts

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#181

In the 8 years that have elapsed since this pitch was made at Google, one conclusion is absolutely crystal clear: the industry has as little self-regulatory control over its use of such dark patterns as the public has over avoiding them. Regulation, taxation, and where necessary, criminalisation, are obvious and necessary. I'll note that for once, the patterns are not entirely synonymous with massive tech monopolies,…

Criminalization of dark patterns? It’s not impossible to imagine — intentionally tricking a user is sometimes called fraud — but I’m not sure we’ve thought through the implications of criminalizing website design. The biggest companies are the ones least affected by regulation, because they can invest resources into complying. Small startups sometimes can’t. A teenager in their bedroom usually can’t. And that’s no sm…

Depends on the regulation. Some things should be obvious: don't collect people's contacts and then send them spam without warning. Don't collect a credit card for a free trial and then start charging it without explicit user action once the trial is over.

But you might argue that doesn't cover all or even most dark patterns, and you'd probably be right.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#182
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criminalization of dark patterns? It’s not impossible to imagine — intentionally tricking a user is sometimes called fraud — but I’m not sure we’ve thought through the implications of criminalizing website design. The biggest companies are the ones least affected by regulation, because they can invest resources into complying. Small startups sometimes can’t. A teenager in their bedroom usually can’t. And that’s no sm…

We've made laws against plenty of thing in the advertising world. - In Australia advertising cigarettes is illegal. - In New Zealand billboards are illegal. - In Australia there are very strict "truth in advertising laws" and breaking them has big penalties. If we really care enough about this issue, we could absolutely make laws preventing certain dark patterns on the web. Given it seems likely that all commerce wil…

> In New Zealand billboards are illegal.

Yeah right.

Billboards are everywhere, not sure where you got that idea.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#183
post #72
post #30

Being made to nibble little bites of text one at a time is a distraction. Images depicting clumsy or irrelevant metaphors of easily understood things are a distraction.

It's a slide deck from a presentation, not an essay.

Hmm, maybe, presentations are a distraction?

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Digital Wellbeing on Android was one major example of something that seemed to have come from this. I believe iOS also built something similar.

Oh, a notification that tells me a distracting device has been distracting me for too long, and that I should take a break. That's effectively nothing: it hasn't challenged the attention model itself. It's like if a casino had scantily-clad women wandering the floor offering men at the slot machines a free drink. They aren't doing that to help the gentlemen, they are just adjusting the incentives.

That's rather uncharitable - Digital Wellbeing has more features than just the notification, which is an entrypoint not the entire product.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#185

In the 8 years that have elapsed since this pitch was made at Google, one conclusion is absolutely crystal clear: the industry has as little self-regulatory control over its use of such dark patterns as the public has over avoiding them. Regulation, taxation, and where necessary, criminalisation, are obvious and necessary. I'll note that for once, the patterns are not entirely synonymous with massive tech monopolies,…

Criminalization of dark patterns? It’s not impossible to imagine — intentionally tricking a user is sometimes called fraud — but I’m not sure we’ve thought through the implications of criminalizing website design. The biggest companies are the ones least affected by regulation, because they can invest resources into complying. Small startups sometimes can’t. A teenager in their bedroom usually can’t. And that’s no sm…

Most regulators do not charge teenagers in their bedrooms except for the most egregious criminal acts. If you are a teenager operating a website from your bedroom, you functionally do not need to worry about ADA, GDPR, etc.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comments make no sense to me in relation to Google. Google of all companies seems to follow this rule of no distractions. which of their apps/services does anything to distract and waste your time? At least for me gmail, photos, docs, Android, maps, are all good stewards of not distracting me. Compare to Twitter that's always trying to get me to follow people they want me to follow ans giving me no way to opt ou…

Youtube?

I don't really understand how YouTube distracts people, or maybe my viewing habits are just weird. I go to YouTube to watch exactly what I want to - usually either a livestream or a VOD from the handful of streamers that I follow - and then I leave. That's it.

Maybe this is easy for me because my watch history is already so tailored that all the videos YouTube throws at me are things I've already seen (and decided to watch/not watch).

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#187

A great thing I did couple months ago was to turn off iOS notifications for email and gmail. I don't quite recollect how email went from an asynchronous mode of communication to a near real-time mode of communication where people often respond within minutes of getting email. Changing my notification settings have reduced a large number of interruptions and I still end up opening the email app a number of times durin…

>I don't quite recollect how email went from an asynchronous mode of communication to a near real-time mode of communication .

When Blackberries and push email took off in the late 2000s.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#188

In the 8 years that have elapsed since this pitch was made at Google, one conclusion is absolutely crystal clear: the industry has as little self-regulatory control over its use of such dark patterns as the public has over avoiding them. Regulation, taxation, and where necessary, criminalisation, are obvious and necessary. I'll note that for once, the patterns are not entirely synonymous with massive tech monopolies,…

Criminalization of dark patterns? It’s not impossible to imagine — intentionally tricking a user is sometimes called fraud — but I’m not sure we’ve thought through the implications of criminalizing website design. The biggest companies are the ones least affected by regulation, because they can invest resources into complying. Small startups sometimes can’t. A teenager in their bedroom usually can’t. And that’s no sm…

A ton of laws are written to accommodate the resource of the companies/individuals subjected to them. You're not subject to the same paperwork if you have 2 employees or 2000.

Now to be honest, I am not sure why startups and teenagers shouldn't be punished if there is proof of willfully crossing the line where users get harmed. Feels to me like arguing that food poisoning shouldn't be criminalized because lemonade stands won't have the means to comply.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's too much to type on a phone but... Assuming it's possible to fix this through government action, it'd probably be by enforcing education that teaches values and mindful decision-making. Right now I think what we get is a collective mindset of enduring education, enduring the workday, and then distracting ourselves into oblivion. The things that suck our attention are the best pastimes because we can do them m…

Let's contrast two addictive and harmful phenomena in order to see what's controlled them and what hasn't: 1) Cigarette smoking: In the last 50 years, the % of adults who smoke has fallen dramatically. WIN. 2) Slot machines: I don't have revenue numbers, but I'd be surprised if the $$ figures have fallen by anything like smoking's. LOSS. Internet addiction (and smartphone addiction) IS harmful. If you disagree with t…

Aren't you using a somewhat circular definition? The trick is to differentiate smartphone usage from addiction, which is determined by whether it's harmful.

Re: A call to minimize distraction and respect users’ attention (2013)

#190

In the 8 years that have elapsed since this pitch was made at Google, one conclusion is absolutely crystal clear: the industry has as little self-regulatory control over its use of such dark patterns as the public has over avoiding them. Regulation, taxation, and where necessary, criminalisation, are obvious and necessary. I'll note that for once, the patterns are not entirely synonymous with massive tech monopolies,…

Criminalization of dark patterns? It’s not impossible to imagine — intentionally tricking a user is sometimes called fraud — but I’m not sure we’ve thought through the implications of criminalizing website design. The biggest companies are the ones least affected by regulation, because they can invest resources into complying. Small startups sometimes can’t. A teenager in their bedroom usually can’t. And that’s no sm…

In addition to fraudulent pretenses for collection, there are practices which are simply predatory or harrassment.

Numerous sites present various dialogues on every visit (more so if you use incognito mode as a rule, I do), or treat Tor access highly differently from direct access (denying access entirely, raising GDPR blocks, putting various nags in the way, or popping up often-impenetrable CAPTCHA dialogues).

There's the case of sites which mandate javascript use to present any content, even if no interactive elements are used.

There are the repeat nags to use apps and such. Twitter's dialogue offers the options "Switch to the app" and that won't-take-no-for-an-answer-creepy-stalker "Not now". (Disabling JS breaks the site fully, reminding me that I actually want to use whatever Nitter site(s) are not yet rate-limited: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances)

There are buttons and other tools which follow users across the Internet and devices.

There are tools that track and correlate multiple signals, including audio tracking (embedded signals in commercial music and advertising broadcasts), MAC address, device ID, Bluetooth ID, SSID locations, etc.

Google have a an "opt-out" standard for SSID identifiers, which really ought to be criminal: https://support.google.com/maps/answer/1725632#how_opt_out&z... (HN discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27518415 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7347397 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22466447)

DuckDuckGo provides counterexamples to several of these, handily illustrating several practices I'd like to see far more widespread:

- There's a no-JS site which works fine in console-mode browsers. I use that for a bash-function CLI search-engine tool (actually, several leveraging DDG's bang searches). Two, actually: https://lite.duckduckgo.com/lite and https://duckduckgo.com/html (standard formatting, but HTML-only functionality).

- There's a "no-nag" URL so you can pop up the search page without any prompt to set DDG as your primary browser: https://start.duckduckgo.com/ (This is a particularly elegant solution IMO to the company's need to convert users to defaulting the search engine, and not annoy those who've long since done so.)

- The site Just Works on Tor. There's an Onion address as well: http://3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion/ I've certainly never encountered a CAPTCHA.

(DDG isn't perfect, the recent Tank Man image censorship resulting from the site's major reliance on Bing for Web and Image search being a notable recent issue.)

A major problem with normalising dark patterns is that they become acceptable, people cannot even conceive that they have an alternative, and that as technologies evolve from early-adopter toy (or secret advantage) to mass-public necessity for commerce, business, government, culture, and social essentials, there is simply no alternative but to be subjected to these patterns. Criminalising these, especially after an initial warning or finding (Because Reasons, regulators often seek relatively modest initial remedies, there are critics of this practice, and many, myself included, would strongly appreciate second offences and further to carry much deeper bite).

The trade and exchange in third-party data and information should be fully and completely outlawed where not specificly and directly authorised and necessary for transactional fulfillment.

Post reply on HN