Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

news.ycombinator.com

341–350 of 383 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#341
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roku is now publicly traded so its beholden to getting quarterly value for shareholder. Investors have deemed all of this data collecting valuable. Capitalism killing innovation by making it another homogeneous device that doesn't respect you doesn't surprise me.

> Capitalism killing innovation by making it another homogeneous device that doesn't respect you doesn't surprise me. What is this weird fascination with capitalism on HN? If a socialist government thought collecting data was a good idea and directed its resources that way, would that okay? My read is (rightly or wrongly) they want to have cloud services, and cloud services require identification.

> > Capitalism killing innovation by making it another homogeneous device that doesn't respect you doesn't surprise me.

> What is this weird fascination with capitalism on HN?

"Comments on the internet" make a lot more sense to me now that I've started reading "capitalism" as "unbridled pursuit of profit". It's a shame that the general internet population seems to think those concepts are one and the same but I'm not sure I have the energy to try to do anything about it.

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#342
post #220
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you dont consider most Linux software user hostile in it's own ways then their really isn't much to discuss here. You've just accepted its series of failures, rather than the failures associated with commercial software.

What? How is grep "user hostile"? How is ls user hostile?

By being named after "global regular expression print" a hilarious in-joke that normies won't get. Everything a normal person deals with uses * for a wildcard search, especially shell globbing does. That means in

    grep .* .*
those are two different behaviours of .* that's pretty hostile, don't you think? Certainly doesn't go with the law of least surprise. Regex itself isn't particularly user friendly but if you know it exists and want to use it, you're not going to guess the tool to use it is "grep". On whatever this Linux is[1] (Debian stretch/sid) I "apropos regex" to work out what tool to use, oh "regex: nothing appropriate", how friendly. [edit: "apropos search" has nothing, "apropos count" has nothing. I'm beginning to suspect it's not working but hasn't noticed that it's not working. Typical user-unfriendly computer behaviour.]

By having a "--help" which tells you about the four different kinds of regular expression it can accept, and nothing about what regular expressions are. By saying "basic regular expression (BRE)." as if someone read somewhere in a textbook that they should explain an acronym before using it. Then never uses the acronym again except where to repeat "basic regular expression (BRE)", sounding like an alien trying to imitate good documentation.

By refusing (unless forced) to list files which exist and do important-to-the-user things like control settings I care about, because said filenames begin with a dot. Arguing that this is helpful to the user to hide information, but at the same time defaulting to showing file sizes in bytes and only showing human readable filenames when poked. By defaulting to showing files in columns which is better for a human to read and only showing file-per-line when asked. These are a mess of defaults - for a human, show files in columns, hide files, show sizes in human readable. For a machine, show file-per-line, size in bytes, all files. And if hiding files for user friendliness, don't hide my config files, hide OS files I never use.

By having so many options for controlling output formatting because the system refuses to do anything helpful (like have/enforce/encourage some platform standard structured format) such that every tool has to have this, and every tool does it differently. That's incredibly user-hostile. The idea that you have to learn something, isn't. The idea that no tool respects what you've learned and makes you learn a different way to do the same things over and over and over, is.

By refusing to match text case insensitively unless specifically told to; that default is the wrong way round for user friendliness, it's the one geeks want to be technically correct, not the one normal English-using people want to get tasks done conveniently.

Like the rejection of video and whining "Ugh is there a transcript anywhere, only normies watch video, I'm a superior text reader so I need a transcript" and willfully "not understanding" that looking at human faces and hearing voices has meaning to people, to demonstrate membership of the "I don't have a TV" superior group. And the related rejection of GUIs, the way GUIs seem to have come out of Xerox Parc, to macOS and Windows, then Linux gets GUIs which are cargo-cult copies of Windows and macOS designs. There's probably a reason why pinch-to-zoom started and got popular at Apple before being aped into Windows, when you'd naively assume that Linux with more ways to connect weird hardware to it, more access to source code, more culture of customisation, would have come up with all kinds of things like that earlier. I'm going to suggest that reason is the embarassment of using something a normie would use, with the forgivable exception of a tiling window manager for laying out terminal windows.

You're presumably going to argue that being hyperliteral is user friendly because that's what geeks want, but being a precision tool for someone in-the-know to use for advanced use cases and scripting is exactly what user friendliness isn't. You might then quip "it's just selective about who its friends are ;)" and guffaw to yourself about how superior you are to be a Friend Of Linux(tm); it's related to the way the "community" believes that easy to use software is for inferior people only, and that using harder to use software is a badge of honor. See also the other reply to your comment sneering "knowledge is user hostile, I guess?!" because the only reason you aren't using Linux is because you can't because you're a baby who doesn't know how, hurrr. It's cult heresy to suggest that the reason you aren't using it is because it's bad, you have to assume it's user friendly as a prior and then contort yourself around it[2].

Nobody feels superior for driving an automatic gearbox car. Gearboxes are a kludge necessary because engines don't have the same torque and efficiency at all speeds. Some people have uses where manual gearboxes are better for choice, cost, reliability, maintenance, other people drive a stop-start commute and making them use a manual gearbox is no overall benefit to them. Yet people do feel superior for driving a stick shift, then go around saying people who don't drive one can't drive, can't count to 6, are worse drivers. Offloading gearboxing to the machine is what you would do if you weren't attached to the identity of being a superior stick-shift driver. As soon as the machine was good-enough at it. The more you have to learn about it to use it, the more user-hostile it is. The more safety guard restrictions on behaviour that could exist but don't, the more user-hostile it is. Manual gearbox without clutch needs more skill, so is more user-hostile.

Also, love how it tells you

    Usage: grep [OPTION]... PATTERN [FILE]...
but if you type the suggested "grep [OPTION]... PATTERN [FILE]..." that just errors out. Presumably that's usage for people who already know how to use it. For everyone else, try 'grep --help' for more information. Information we could have shown you right here, but we don't really understand humans. Maybe you remember what grep is, and all the options, and regex language, and need information, but that single hint is enough. It could happen.

(Also, enjoy how "grep xyz" complains that there is no such file or directory as xyz, but "grep /etc" complains that "/etc: is a directory"). (Rust people spent a good deal of time on compiler error messages. Perhaps this is an underappreciated reason why Rust is dramatically more hyped than many other languages?)

[1] on windows I can run systeminfo or get-computerinfo to find out what OS I'm using, both reasonably named . Good thing I happen to know to poke at /etc/REDHAT_RELEASE or in this case /etc/debian_version. On Windows I can use type or get-content or notepad to read the file, two tools with names that hint at being relevant, one which isn't so far away. On Linux I can use cat for catenating files, less the in-joke named pager (because less is more! snerk snerk). "type" and "edit" both do something totally unrelated.

[2] You have to contort yourself around the computer on Windows and macOS and iOS as well; but at least they strived to have consistent platform UX guidelines which were pro-user at the cost of more work for the developers, for many years. I'm not arguing there are computers one never has to learn, although Brett Victor and Dynamicland might surpass everyone on that front, I'm more arguing that poorly named, inconsistent tools with text only, no GUI, no graphics, full of in-jokes, and beloved for their hyper-literal do-what-I-say scripting precision are absolutely not "user friendly".

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even worse with games. If you buy a game on steam, steam has an account api that is completely usable for online play, but the game companies want more data so they force you to make an account with them. I have a stadia account and I've taken to doing the same thing. If i go to play a game and the first thing it wants me to do is create an account, I'm not playing that game, and I'm telling support about it.

Why not just set up a throwaway email for all of it? =\

For me, it's the principal of the thing. It's not that it's such a terrible thing for a company to know my email address (especially when apple makes it trivial to create throwaway ones for your iCloud account, their "hide my email" feature has improved so that now you can just make bespoke randomly generated email addresses that look exactly like an unassuming iCloud account, but forward to yours.)

The reason I do this is because I am so fundamentally against the concept of a gaming company harvesting personal information about its users, that I feel like a shitty person for being complicit in it. I'd rather miss out on the occasional good game than be "part of the problem".

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#344
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There was a movie where a guy got out of prison after a lengthy sentence and his words seem to ring more true to me each and every day: "The world got itself in a damn hurry and it seems there is no place now for a feeble old man like me" Shawshank?

Yeah I think that might be the one, it has been a while since I watched it.

Yup: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111161/quotes/qt0470737

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or because they have no other choice. It's mind-boggling that the very people responsible for creating this landscape have the audacity to throw up their hands and try to absolve themselves of responsibility for the things they built by saying "idk the users just love being screwed". We must do better.

> We must do better. Meaning what? Name-and-shame clearly won't do the job. The only solution I can see is for there to be laws against dark patterns. The profit incentive for user-hostile design isn't going to go away.

I would absolutely support stronger regulation. Unfortunately, I don't believe the Overton window will be there in the United States for some time.

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#346
post #98

If you ask me it's due to a confluence of: - People like and expect stuff on the internet to be free; - The companies who produce this stuff have shareholders who want to see their squiggly lines go up. Honourable mention: Because cybersecurity is hard and involves saving users from themselves. That's my oversimplified take, anyways.

I think a lot of people are willing to pay for a lot of things, as long as it's a low-friction affair. Which payments on the intertubez are not. As an example, I recently wanted to read a newspaper article that was paywalled; so I figured I'd just pay. I ended up noping out after being presented with a form that wanted so much PII that it basically reeked of identity theft. This was Belgium's largest news site. If they'd have just given me an option to pay a one time fee of €0.50, no questions asked, no fuss, no PII, then I would have paid it in a heartbeat.

Online payments suck and need to be addressed (way beyond what Stripe is doing). But many companies are basically gaming this broken system to force people into hard-to-cancel subscriptions, or are profiteering off of outrageous transaction fees (looking at you, PayPal).

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#347
Software is never finished. There are always new features to be added, tech debt to be serviced, security and functionality updates to be put in place, new technologies to try out, to see if they help.

No UI is perfect. Even if it was, the perfect UI for today may be awful the day after tomorrow. Perfection is a moving target.

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then our infinite growth economy is like an invasive species that has taken over the planet. Hunting resources to extinction, growing ever larger and all-encompassing, heating up our planet with its metabolic cycle of fossil fuel extraction and burning.

Interesting thing about exponential growth: it always comes to an end rather quickly. If it weren't so, the planet would be completely covered in rabbits.

Sounds like a good reason not to base a global economy on it, then.

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#349
post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>effective at making money I think you hit the nail on the head. I also want to add that one of the arguments on moving everything to the web (applications I mean) was that the web interface was intuitive and didn't require documentation. That may have been true in many cases in 1999, but it certainly isn't now. That leaves users to click around to try to figure out how to use the web app through trial and error. Not…

> I also want to add that one of the arguments on moving everything to the web (applications I mean) was that the web interface was intuitive and didn't require documentation. I strongly disagree with this. The reason most apps (or rather, most software) moved to the web is because of a few factors: 1. No installer necessary - this made getting people running much faster and more reliable. 2. You could monetize in a…

I was mainly referring to intranet web apps created by businesses. Most of the big players in the 90s didn't port to web apps until fairly recently and I can only think of Microsoft Office, which I still prefer the app over the web experience.

>if you think what most people do with computers today is harder than it was in the past, you are just plain wrong.

Depends on what you mean by harder. Software certainly is more complex than in the 80s and 90s.

>Being able to hit F1 to get help was something that was done by maybe .1% of the population.

You just made that up. I wrote software in the 90s and still do. Context sensitive help was invaluable.

>we've also just gotten better as an industry on making software

Software certainly is more complex than it used to be. Sometimes it is necessarily so, most times it just seems like devs like to use the latest whiz-bang framework to pad their resume. I'm not sure I would call that better. In the 90s, we'd develop software expecting it to last at least 20 years. Today, it's "move fast and break things."

Re: Ask HN: Why is today's Internet experience so user hostile?

#350
That's the way you make money on the internet. Count on slow frog boil syndrome and decreasing expectations of your clientale. For example there was an app I liked a lot (free game) . At first there were no ads, just a donate button in the settings. Then a sliver text ad. Then page ads between screen loads that were enforced at about 15 seconds each (or so). And then ads you had to click off randomly as the game would stop and pop them up seemingly randomly. Obviously I gave up the game.
Post reply on HN