Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

cedwards.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 403 posts

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#241

Post by eddythompson80 »

DropInIn wrote: post #222
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The staff or someone with them scans it upon request.

So blind people are required to give a stranger thier unlocked phone? Really, there's not a single thing that can be said to make it less stupid.

Or they can touch and feel the QR sticker and scan it. QR and bar codes are also increasingly more embossed or have borders specifically for that reason. There are special QR reader apps for the blind that help with that more. It is generally the more recommended way by AFB for making your products accessible for the blind

https://www.afb.org/blindness-and-low-vision/using-technolog...

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#242

Post by mcpackieh »

RadiozRadioz wrote: post #239
mcpackieh wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is even worse. You can't trust either Mozilla or Google to vet the extensions they publish for spyware. So you have to trust and/or verify that this extension does what it says and no more. But worse, you have to vigilantly watch the extension for any changes, even if you trust the developer today he may sell it to a spyware company at any time.

This is an open source extension, as stated in the description on both pages. The repository is linked in both, feel free to build it from source and install it locally. You don't even need these extensions, you can set up a redirect rule in uBlock Origin (if you trust that). I sent these extensions to remedy the stated need to manually rewrite the URL, I did not say that using these extensions is a better solution t…

To install an extension locally in Firefox you have to be using a special build or jump through other hoops. All of this goes back to the point; that Reddit is employing the "fuck you" pattern when they force you to jump through such hoops to use the version of their website that actually works.

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#243

Post by MrDresden »

Removed Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp from my life some years ago, and then promptly blocked them all from my local LAN (also dns sinkhole them on my Android device).

Couldn't be happier with my decision.

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#244

Post by fwlr »

roughly wrote: post #225
fwlr wrote: post #53

The IP-level block you experienced after trying to get around the login modal is an anti-scraping measure. I doubt it is based on anything like “detecting that you’ve opened web inspector”, it’s much more likely that Instagram is running some heuristic that tries to bucket you into either “potential signup” or “scraper trying to download as many images as possible”, and once your behavior pattern fits into the second…

Insta definitely uses IP blocks to force login walls, but I don’t think it’s anti-scraping, because the limit seems to be like 3 images before you get redirected to log in - it’s way too low and too much of a pain in the ass to normal users to be intentionally anti-scraping and unintentionally anti-logged-out-users.

The fact that it pushes anonymous viewers to log in or sign up is definitely a positive (for their conversion rate metric, if nothing else), and that might be the main reason the number of images is so low. But the specific mechanism of IP blocking that is used to achieve restriction - that is anti-scraping, pure and simple.

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#245

Post by eddythompson80 »

mindslight wrote: post #220
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The staff or someone with them scans it upon request.

This sounds like "compliance" attorneys gone crazy. It's appalling, but does check out with the bureaucratic cancer eating our society. Waitstaff or the cashier reading menu options sounds like wonderful accommodation. Certainly much more so than impersonally telling a customer to solve their own problem by turning their dining session into a web browsing session.

That's an extremely bigoted way of looking at it. Blind people deserve autonomy too as much as possible. How would you like it if the waitstaff just stood next to you to read the menu to you and wait for you to make a decision?

Having a braille option is ideal, but not every vision impaired person can read braille and it puts a significant burden on every establishment. Readers provide a great alternative to that that restores a lot of autonomy to blind people.

Why have ADA at all? Just have every disabled person wait for an able-bodied person to just help them with whatever it's they need, right?

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#246

Post by marcod »

wpietri wrote: post #107
bombcar wrote: post #4

The Pinterest::Google interaction is the most annoying of these; it seems impossible to find an image result from Google on the page Pinterest shows you.

Which is especially funny given that Pinterest's business is basically one giant copyright violation. "We'll boost everybody's photos, but god forbid anybody take any of our stolen content from us!"

Glad I checked before adding another thread about how much I hate pinterest.

Seriously, no honor among thieves! :p

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#247

Post by mdorazio »

jitix wrote: post #134
guestbest wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a Trojan Horse pattern, really. They give away the service for free membership with billions of VC until their competitors collapse or fade away, then they start becoming more aggressive with ads and/or charging for premium access which used to be free.

This is not new, Gillette used to give out free razors to get people used to their ecosystem and get recurring revenue. It’s just more “in your face” now.

Loss Leader is not the same economically as Dumping. Gillette is the former, VC-backed companies are the latter. Loss Leader tactics are sustainable in a competitive market, but Dumping is profit negative until someone (hopefully your competition) goes out of business.

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#248

Post by thih9 »

This was the status quo for most users for years, tech users just used to work around the front end security via dev tools / content blockers.

So now they implemented it on the back end too.

After all, why should they allow you to view the content on their servers?

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#249

Post by mindslight »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #235
mindslight wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm happy paying for a few personal cloud servers, more than I need perhaps. I'm happy paying for a solid Internet connection, electricity, computers, hard drives, UPSs, etc. I'm happy for paying for VOIP PSTN connectivity, mobile connectivity, etc. With very few exceptions (mostly arising out of expedience), I do not pay for software . I honestly do wish the dynamics of the software ecosystem were different, so that…

Most of the time in the current era you're not paying for software. You're paying for software as a service. You're paying someone to take on the operational aspects of running a service because to you the value is in using the software, not in operating it. It's all opportunity cost.

Sure, reframing the terminology further onto the paradigm of centralization doesn't change what I said. I don't pay for software, nor services aimed at replacing what can be self-representing software.

Speaking of opportunity costs - yes, you do pay an opportunity cost to find, set up, and learn software that represents your interests. But then down the line, you continually save on opportunity costs from hostile software not continually having you over a barrel. Because while you're correct that the value comes from using the software, outsourcing the operation of it is a trap that will continually try to capture more and more of the surplus value you'd otherwise gain from using it.

Re: The 'fuck you' pattern (2021)

#250

Post by TeMPOraL »

sshine wrote: post #224
TheAngush wrote: post #186

I had an experience like this today when I tried to use GlassDoor for the first time. As a student making my first ever job applications, I wanted to see what salaries and work environments were like at particular employers. GlassDoor did the same scroll-locking tactic (so an element zapper like Ublock Origin's wouldn't resolve the issue), instructing me to register or sign in to view any information. So I registered…

Your expectation was that this information was free, and you got offended when you realised they trade in information and you have to pay with giving some back? This is not a dark pattern any more than giving a company like GlassDoor this information is a dark deed.

Beyond not disclosing the requirement up front being a clear dark pattern, I'd think this is self-defeating. The only time I need Glassdoor is when I'm contemplating changing jobs. Leaving a review for my current employer feels extremely risky, as the no. 1 type of users of Glassdoor are HR departments.
Post reply on HN