Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK • Hacker News Board

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#201

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:09 PM UTC

Perseids wrote: post #191

lotharbot wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "people are using the down arrow as a "I disagree" button.." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness." - pg, 2382 days ago http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347 "Downvoting has always been used to express…

> FWIW I did not downvote you in this thread (I actually upvoted you.) I'm just informing you of the principle -- downvote for disagreement is totally cool on HN. I disagree. From what I've come to expect from the voting behavior, downvotes are reserved for comments that are badly written (missing punctuation etc.), insulting or objectively false in an easily verifiable manner (like "Java does not include floating po…

[deleted]

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#202

Post by saosebastiao » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:09 PM UTC

rmc wrote: post #196

saosebastiao wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody can give you shipping charges without knowing your address. The credit card step exists because most of the time the billing address and shipping address are the same.

I have a few addresses in my amazon account, and post to one 99% of the time. It shouldn't take a genius to figure that out.

And misquote to you 1% of the time? That would open them up to a fraud claim 1% of the time.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#203

Post by lorddoig » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:10 PM UTC

Take the number of times you've heard the sentiment "and this will protect consumers! yay!" - call it h (for hope). Now take the number of times you've heard such sentiments be justified in a logical, rigorous manner - call it j.

Calculate an independent thought index, t, as follows: j / h.

Call me if it's greater than 0.01. I'll be over here in the corner watching as we entrench half- (or hundredth-?)baked ideas into statute books that don't change for decades.

The economic damage of these petty regs (enforcement, compliance, cognitive load on businesses, yadda yadda) far outstrips that which brought them into existence in the first place - that I'd put my life on (but good luck actually measuring it.)

These kinds of 'consumer protection' laws are exactly the reason why the UK only has 5 major banks operating as a government-backed cartel - the laws became so complex that the market is impossible to enter now. Just ask Richard Branson - he wanted a bank for a long time, but the only way he could get one was to buy a preexisting one. This argument extends almost verbatim to the insurance and payment processing (and more) industries.

The internet is what it is because it has been almost completely free (as in liberal) and had very low barriers to entry up until very recently. The day I have to fill in a government form to open a webshop else fear prosecution is the day we let another good thing die - and shit like this is a big step down that road.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#204

Post by bh3244 » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:14 PM UTC

lorddoig wrote: post #203

Take the number of times you've heard the sentiment "and this will protect consumers! yay!" - call it h (for hope ). Now take the number of times you've heard such sentiments be justified in a logical, rigorous manner - call it j . Calculate an independent thought index, t , as follows: j / h . Call me if it's greater than 0.01. I'll be over here in the corner watching as we entrench half- (or hundredth-?)baked ideas…

laws should be based on logic and not emotion. unfortunately I doubt anyone will campaign against this and if they do they will be portrayed as pro-cronyism or that they are somehow for the things that this measure aims to prevent.

the UK seems fond of things like this though. As I recall you must be 18 years old to buy a plastic knife, as it is considered a deadly weapon.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#205

Post by bh3244 » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:17 PM UTC

skynetv2 wrote: post #22

when will the US adopt a similar law? Ticketmaster will be first one to go bonkers if this law ever makes it to the US

hopefully never. The more of these frivolous regulations the more hard it becomes to compete with existing businesses.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#206

Post by lorddoig » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:20 PM UTC

bh3244 wrote: post #204

lorddoig wrote: post #203

Take the number of times you've heard the sentiment "and this will protect consumers! yay!" - call it h (for hope ). Now take the number of times you've heard such sentiments be justified in a logical, rigorous manner - call it j . Calculate an independent thought index, t , as follows: j / h . Call me if it's greater than 0.01. I'll be over here in the corner watching as we entrench half- (or hundredth-?)baked ideas…

laws should be based on logic and not emotion. unfortunately I doubt anyone will campaign against this and if they do they will be portrayed as pro-cronyism or that they are somehow for the things that this measure aims to prevent. the UK seems fond of things like this though. As I recall you must be 18 years old to buy a plastic knife, as it is considered a deadly weapon.

Although that sounds completely believable, I think in this instance it's only sharp knives over a certain length, and if I'm not mistaken I think the age 16. But never fear, HM Government will no doubt fall over themselves trying to appease the relatives of the one teenager who managed to gouge their own brain out with a plastic knife (when it happens).

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#207

Post by Perseids » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:22 PM UTC

V-2 wrote: post #190

Perseids wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are also often referring to the United Kingdom as "England" (disregarding the existence of Scotland and Wales) More to the point, when I use "England" instead of "United Kingdom" I disregard the separation and jurisdictional peculiarities of Scotland, Wales and England and refer to the whole as "England". As neither I nor the great majority of people in my social circles know how their government works preci…

That's what it's like from your point of view, sure, but I'm kind of taking the point of view of someone who values Scottish (or Welsh) national identity and for them being labeled as "England" even for the sake of convenience could be a bit of a slap (and again, not that it's your intention, obviously). For what it's worth: roughly 10 years ago, when Poland was about to join the EU, Yes supporters used a slogan "Yes…

> I would see this slogan (consciously playing on the Eastern complex, to be sure) as somewhat offensive in its coarseness. What was it really saying? 1000 years of European history and heritage doesn't matter and you are disqualified from being an European if you don't support joining the EU? :)

I'd see the slogan in a more positive light: After all, we are all Europeans and we have enough common heritage to work together. That's what I associate with the EU, the wish to overcome our historic differences and build a political union that is up to our globalized world, something strong enough to defend the values we share. And also the dream to live in a more united world. For example, when I worked in Switzerland for half a year, there were all those little things that acutely showed me that I was a second class resident. In other EU countries I've got more of a feeling of having a right to be there, not being just tolerated or granted a favor.

Maybe as a German I'm also a little bit insensitive to national identities. Having a glaring historical example in everyone's mind of what certain kinds of nationalism and patriotism can lead to has sure driven that kind of "belonging somewhere" out of me. Foremost I see myself as a European and as member of certain online communities that don't exist geographically and only then as a German.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#208

Post by JohnTHaller » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:34 PM UTC

I've noticed that eNom/Bulk Register has stopped sneaking bogus 'mobile website converter trial' and similar nonsense into the cart when you buy/renew domain names as of late. They're designed to not have a fee for the first month, so they sneak it into your cart and then hope you don't notice when it starts automatically billing to your credit card a month later. I wonder if their disappearance is related to this?

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#209

Post by krisdol » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:40 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #117

Someone1234 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then people are "increasingly" using it incorrectly. Europe is a continent, the EU is a political alliance. There are too many countries within Europe but not in the EU to use the terms synonymously. For example: Albania, Andorra, Belarus, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, Vatican City I think…

> Then people are "increasingly" using it incorrectly. Europe is a continent, the EU is a political alliance. Well, it's exactly the same as with America (the continent) and United States (a country). You can either argue that both calling EU Europe and USA America is wrong and we should stop, or accept that in both cases, people can figure things out from the context.

USA has always been called "America". Europe the continent has been Europe the continent far longer than the EU has existed. Both are incorrect, and thankfully "The Americas" has caught on to fix one of these wrong labels. Besides, the continent has always been called North America, not America. There is no other label of Europe the continent than "Europe", so it's a flat out wrong label of the EU at best, and at worst it's offensive to those not living in the Alliance.

Re: Some Dark Patterns Now Illegal in UK

#210

Post by Karunamon » Tue, Aug 26, 2014, 9:57 PM UTC

lorddoig wrote: post #203

Take the number of times you've heard the sentiment "and this will protect consumers! yay!" - call it h (for hope ). Now take the number of times you've heard such sentiments be justified in a logical, rigorous manner - call it j . Calculate an independent thought index, t , as follows: j / h . Call me if it's greater than 0.01. I'll be over here in the corner watching as we entrench half- (or hundredth-?)baked ideas…

I find it really, really hard to give a crap about the poor ickle businesses in this case, because you're not going to trip over these laws unless you're going out of your way to do something sneaky.

If you enter into it with good faith, i.e. be as forthright as possible with your customer, you won't end up in a situation where these laws will ever apply to you.

The people that will have a massive "cognitive load" are those who see the regulations as barriers and impediments to be worked around.

Things such as "Don't insert shit into your customer's cart that they didn't explicitly and knowingly request" is one example of the regulation, and is dead simple to both comprehend and implement. The intent and practical application of this particular piece of this particular regulation is crystal clear, and will only be muddied by people who like to rules lawyer terms like "explicitly and knowingly request". I know what it means. You know what it means. Every person with a functioning set of brain cells knows what it means. Shady companies will have a hard time with this.