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

The 'Fuck You' Pattern

cedwards.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 619 posts

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#451

Post by makeitdouble »

charwalker wrote: post #205
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

Either you're the customer or you're the product. Recognizing that nearly all internet companies do this allows you to identify what level you're comfortable with and duck out or move on if needed. It's always good to review your social media habits and scale back. I recommend doing this the same time you're spring cleaning or after you prep for winter. Also go through and unsubscribe from emails and update passwords…

> Either you're the customer or you're the product.

Or you're both. Or perhaps none.

I kinda like that we have now such a big, visible and studied echosystem where we'll see any pattern working at a significant scale.

Any kind of dichotomy just doesn't cut it anymore I think.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#452

Post by emptyparadise »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

"No, fuck you. The internet was never meant to be this."

I understand how this shitty agreement came to be but that doesn't mean that I like having my experience online be a metaphorical middle finger.

They spent billions in infrastructure and staffing to hijack the free internet where I could look at cat pictures on cat picture websites that had cat pictures as the goal, all so they could show me ads, and they have the nerve to say that I'm in the wrong for not being happy about that?

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#453

Post by [deleted] »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

[deleted]

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#454

Post by bombcar »

nine_k wrote: post #369
e12e wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical infrastructure and staffing so you can sit at home and spend your time looking at cats for free? No, they have your attention and they're going to connect you to organizations who will pay for it. "The infrastructure" to share cat pictures cost peanuts. It's the addictive dark patterns and montezation/tracking that costs millions. That's the irony.

Go an and run a site that serves massive amounts of cat pictures for peanuts! Well, yes, serving static HTML is easy. Serving images is kind of not hard either, because you have free unlimited traffic, don't you? Some hosting plans offer it. They just limit the egress bandwidth. So maybe you need a few more servers to cope with it, just like $50 a pop. You're not gonna need any CDN, people further away from your DC w…

We just need a standardized cat and picture thereof - perhaps even expand the standard to cover one of each breed.

Then you can have a local copy and be sure you have every standard cat in existence!

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#455

Post by turtletontine »

tantalor wrote: post #156
nkingsy wrote: post #4

Q: But what about the unauthenticated existing users we might alienate? A: There’s no way to gather data on that so it’s not a thing. This is the problem with “data driven” decision making in a nutshell. It has annoyed me to no end at every company I’ve worked for.

Who says you can't collect user metrics from unauthenticated users?

with Instagram, I think the thought process is closer to: we can get a lot more data from them if we coerce them into logging in

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#456

Post by sriku »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

It's not just about ads .. they can just show them to this visitor if it was. It's about targeted ads. They have slightly limited ability to target if the viewer doesn't sign in .. for which the viewer needs to accept their T&C .. which is needed for them so someone doesn't sue them for invading their privacy without their consent.

IANAL so I'm not sure whether such a suit will stand in any court.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#457

Post by PikachuEXE »

axbytg wrote: post #5

Reddit is full of these patterns in order to drive users from mobile web to app. Reddit mobile web really sets the bar for user-hostile UI in my opinion.

I now use https://libredd.it with Privacy Redirect browser extension.

I don't even need to use old.reddit.com for daily browsing now. (Unless need to comment)

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#458

Post by jokethrowaway »

XorNot wrote: post #428
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #57

"Wow, fuck you. I just wanted to look at cats." "Well, fuck you, too. We're here to sell ads." It's not about dark patterns, that's just a second-order effect. It was never about dark patterns. This is the implied agreement. You understand it, or you don't. And if you don't, I guess you haven't been on the web in the past decade or something. What? You thought it was fair that a company spends millions in technical i…

So how does this explain why Windows 10, which I have paid like $150 for per license, is now infested with ads, tracking and online presence - and close to impossible to buy without that. They aren't even trying to put a $ figure on what they think it's worth - because they can't be stopped from doing it. There is no implied agreement, it's exactly as stated.

The single killer feature of windows, unrivaled by Mac or Linux, is playing video-games.

Expensive professional software is often available on Mac.

Probably the target market for windows evolved to become people who tolerate advertising (or at least that's what PMs at M$ think).

Half the price is paid in the license fee. The other half is a lifetime of ads exposure.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#459

Post by brailsafe »

axbytg wrote: post #5

Reddit is full of these patterns in order to drive users from mobile web to app. Reddit mobile web really sets the bar for user-hostile UI in my opinion.

I think they're trying to push it to just before the point where people actually consider how useful the content is (not very), or maybe past that point, after which they'll put out some superficial "we're sorry" bs.

Re: The 'Fuck You' Pattern

#460

Post by chrisweekly »

jonathankoren wrote: post #448
6502nerdface wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess someone could argue that it only costs $150 because of the ads. Windows 95 cost well over twice that when it was launched (inflation adjusted). Maybe in the same way that airfares are way cheaper than they were in the 90s, but with much crappier included service.

Let’s be honest though. Windows is supported through OEM licenses. M$ (yeah, I’m dusting this off here, due to the context) isn’t strapped for cash.

scrapped -> strapped
Post reply on HN