Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fix is to hold down the back button so the local history shows up, and pick the right page to go back to. Unfortunately, some versions of Chrome and/or Android seem to break this but that's a completely self-inflicted problem.
That's not a fix. It's a workaround.
A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
141–150 of 532 posts
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#142Excuse me??
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#143Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, there are two conceptions of the back button, and the browser only implements one. One conception is "take me back to the previous screen I was on", one is "take me one level up the hierarchy." They're often but not always the same. Mac Finder is a perfect example of a program correctly implementing the two. If you're deep in some folder and then press cmd+win+l to go to ~/Downloads, cmd+up will get y…
> one is "take me one level up the hierarchy." They're often but not always the same. Who expects this behavior? It doesn't make sense. You just want to go back where you were. Most file browsers I've used wanting to implement going up a level in hierarchy, have an arrow pointing up.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also www.reddit.com is/was doing the same back button hijacking. From google.com visiting a post, then clicking back and you would find yourself on Reddit general feed instead of back to Google.
I do not see this behaviour on the latest version of Firefox. I do use old.reddit, however.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
I cannot even reliably press [Space] any more to page down through sites that are meant to be all about content!
I've always found that behavior baffling so it's interesting to hear someone using it as intended instead of being frustrated by it.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really comes down to JavaScript. The web was fine when sites were static HTML, images, and forms with server-side rendering (allowing for forums and blogs).
Did you use the web back in 1995? It was fun, but it also sucked compared to what we have now. Nothing is ever perfect, but I wouldn’t want to go back.
Now it’s owned by corporates and everyone is using bloated JS frameworks.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not a fix. It's a workaround.
It's a fix because it completely solves the issue on any site, without requiring changes from LinkedIn or any other actor.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a fix because it completely solves the issue on any site, without requiring changes from LinkedIn or any other actor.
It's a work around to them making changes to deliberately change the expected results of pressing "back"