Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're describing 2 different concepts, back and up, not 2 backs
Exactly. It is crazy that they described MacOS finder as doing this correctly when finder has no concept of up, it only has a back.
A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
421–430 of 532 posts
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is available for me on iOS https://old.reddit.com/r/all/
I'm not sure what exact device you're using, but on iPhone 12 Mini, old.reddit.com is borderline unusable, very different experience compared to if you could access r/all like before via the actually usable web+mobile version, a comparison: https://imgur.com/a/AVGjjCN Anyways, the end result has been I don't use reddit at all on the phone, so kind of ended up being good for me anyways.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#423Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hacker News must be borderline unusable for you as well then, no? On my phone? Yes, absolutely, impossible to hit the links correctly even if I zoom in. Both old reddit and HN is "Fully functional" on desktop, agree, but far cry from "fully functional" on my arguably tiny iPhone.
Is that a ios browser difference? I browse hn all the time on my android phone and I didn't think my screen was unusually big. Maybe they implement some different scaling?
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#425That's cool if they can make it work. I don't understand how Google's indexing work anymore. I've had some website very well indexed for years and years which suddenly disappeared from the index with no explanation, even on the Search Console ("visited, not indexed"). Simple blog entries, lightweight pages, no JavaScript, no ads, no bad practices, https enabled, informative content that is linked from elsewhere inclu…
There's yer problem....
Google isn't interested in helping people find pages with no ads.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obligatory Kagi mention
Kagi costs money and isn't that great to begin with
And I've found it so good that I haven't used Google, except by accident, in the past 18 months.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obligatory Kagi mention
Kagi costs money and isn't that great to begin with
I respect a lot of them, people I respect a lot, and I saw people like Jon Gjengset use it. so I gave it a few months of daily use. I just eventually drifted back to Google. The results weren't better for anything I search for. It felt different, but not better in any measurable way. $10/mo for a different feel is a strange value prop.
DuckDuckGo sits in the same spot for me. I want to like it, and I don't think one company should own web search, but when I need to find something Google finds it first. I wish the answer were different, but that's just how things are.
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
Usually when I see this from non-spam sites, it's not even pushstate, it's just some page that redirects as soon as it loads. So you press back twice and it goes back -> forwards -> back -> forwards. Disabling pushstate doesn't fix that, it just makes pushstate equivalent to a redirect.
I haven't had that problem in a while. Did browser vendors already do something about it?
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ctrl+f is a bad offender. No I don't want to use your contextual search. I want to search for this word on this page!
Half of the time those sites also lazy load anyway so whatever you're looking for isn't even in the DOM yet
Re: A new spam policy for “back button hijacking”
#430As usual, it's a good first step but doesn't go far enough. I don't want my back-button hijacked by _anything_. My issue with back-button hijacking isn't even spam/ads (I use an ad-blocker so I don't see those), but sites that do a "are you sure you want to leave? You haven't even subscribed to our newsletter yet?!"
> are you sure you want to leave I would argue there is a place for this in web-apps. For example I have a SaaS app and I employ this on any form pages where the user has already started to enter information in. I have considered form persistence so in the event a user goes back to a previous page, realizes it's a mistake and goes forward again, their form state from the previous state is persisted. But I would like…
That's very different to sites like tomshardware that pops up a "hey why don't you check out this extra slop you didn't ask for" when you try to navigate away