Live data from Hacker News

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

minimizedistraction.com

221–230 of 285 posts

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

#221

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…

Maybe another wave of dark pattern consent prompt to click agree?

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

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate "engagement". I am a weird person. When I used to go to a movie theater, I stayed and watched the credits at the end. There would be some closing music, and maybe a few outtakes. It was always interesting to see how many people it took to make a movie and what they all did. A nice way to unwind and acknowledge everyone who created the movie. Lately I've been watching The Sopranos on Amazon. As soon as the end…

Likewise radio stations' playing songs back to back without a gap. "Stairway to Heaven" deserves a second or two of silence after finishing.

My understanding of this is that it’s done deliberately to prevent listeners from recording the full track. Made more sense when the radio was _the_ way to listen to new music. Less so now.

There are places in the world where the DJ will literally come on in the middle of the song and play their station ident for the same reason.

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

#223
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…

> New Zealand billboards are illegal.

- yeah right.

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

#224
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've come to the conclusion that this is the 21st century's "TV rots your brain." We've replaced channel surfing with doom scrolling. The difference with the TV is that TV didn't have individual, high granularity demographic and usage data to conform to its users' most exploitable side that ultimately drives mindless "engagement". TV ratings had coarsely sampled data at household levels and whatever broadcast was w…

> The difference with the TV is that TV didn't have individual, high granularity demographic and usage data to conform to its users' most exploitable side that ultimately drives mindless "engagement". TV ratings had coarsely sampled data at household levels and whatever broadcast was what everyone saw. I agree. I fail to see how what we have now is inherently worse...especially for cultural minorities. Exploiting psy…

> I fail to see how what we have now is inherently worse...especially for cultural minorities. Exploiting psychological weakness to keep people's attention goes back a long, long way. That's never going away

The "attack surface", so to speak, is larger with individualized content consumption. With TV at max we have N channels that can broadcast N different viewpoints with the intention to rile M people up, at most in N different ways. Youtube can rile M people up in M different ways. M is orders of magnitude larger than N.

There is an economical model somewhat analogous to this; price discrimination. Charging the absolute highest price every individual consumer would individually pay yields the absolute maximum profit. In contrast, having a visible price tag that makes everyone pay the same price leaves a lot of those profits on the table. In youtube's case, riling everyone up individually with their particularized content maximizes the engagement. Trying to rile groups of people with the same content doesn't yield the same engagement.

> There would have to be evidence of mental "obesity" that somehow began with social media and did not exist before.

You're right, references to information obesity goes back to Baudrillard. That said keep in mind absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, even if our grandparents were complaining about a similar phenomena it doesn't mean our intuition about it is as inflated nor the phenomenon are in comparable scales. Not only that, credibility of past grievances go both ways; it took a long while to get cigarettes classified properly carcinogenic.

As for hard evidence, we could use non-work screen time as a proxy, which increases especially in younger demographics. It is still not a perfect comparison because different screens have different information densities and user interaction modalities.

As an indirect evidence I would suggest an increase in intensity and multi-valency of culture wars.

Current phase of the internet is at best a decade old, so there is also going to be an availability bias when looking for evidence.

I also couldn't help noticing you working in high profile media companies like Disney and Twitch in the past, I don't think you would assert it wouldn't ever affect your neutrality on this matter.

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

#225

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…

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…

> 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.

There is no need for prompt, just a text box below search box should be enough. But the way web uses the dark patterns, it's now considered ok to have such annoyance everywhere.

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

#226
When I first read this earlier today, my thoughts were that it was for the user to choose good tools and learn to use them well.

But now I've modified that opinion to:

Not everyone has 'what it takes' (to guard their flow, etc.), but everyone benefits if those who do help the rest.

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

#227

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…

Possibly unpopular opinion, but I don't see why so important to protect "small startups" from regulation in any situation.

If you serve a million users then those million users will be affected by your mistakes and your unethical business decisions, no matter how many people are on your payroll.

If you don't have the resources to comply, why are you serving a million users in the first place?

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

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been dying for a tool like this. Just want to sort hacker news by week / months. So I could stop checking everyday. Will give feedback

"Just want to sort hacker news by week" HN has hidden functionality for that: https://news.ycombinator.com/best https://news.ycombinator.com/lists

Absolutely. I recently switched my bookmark to https://news.ycombinator.com/best and I get much more high-quality links in the list. Now, I read about 60% of the stories. Previously it was more like 10%.

Also, links stay on the page for ~3 days, so I spend much less time scrolling because I already saw almost everything.

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

#229

Isn't it ironic, that google initially beat the competition, by being a distraction free, no bullshit search engine? People DO care about this stuff. It is a question on how much they put up with, if there's an alternative and how difficult it is to change.

This! I moved to duckduckgo, it also has some very nice features calculating weight/length conversions and time shifts. It's super clean. Type in "Jupyter notebook keyboard shortcuts" and it just gives you the table. It's wonderful. If google would still be that clean and gave me features that I need, I would return. But, 90% of my searches are now with a competitor.

hot damn, just try "tmux cheat sheet" and it's nice to see the result. I'll try it for a few more weeks but DDG seems to not have the "tournament widget" at the moment (as in searching for copa america or wimbledon will show recent results and future matches)

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

#230
post #172

The SF product designers have the power to influence billions, but there are no consequences. So long as there are no consequences, we'll keep asking questions and merely propising these hypothetical limiters to prevent the world from being distracted. I have a feeling that the mechanisms of addiction are tied to evolved human instinct, and we will have to essentially fight back against our own genes to have any chan…

They don't have any power in this area. Those big companies hire industrial psychologists and neuroscientists to calculate precisely how often notifications should be issued to give you that little squirt of dopamine and be hooked. The notifications are not an accident, they are by design.

Exactly. When we become aware of our instincts and know to take advantage of them, in addition to baseline human ability, it's even worse.
Post reply on HN