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

The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

nirandfar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 89 posts

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#71

Post by Cpoll »

edtruji wrote: post #49
gnicholas wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years, every AT&T and Comcast salesperson I talked with quoted me megabytes per second instead of megabits per second. They would insist that they were right if I ever asked them to clarify the units of measurement. One time the salesperson was so sure that he was right that he conferenced in a tech support person…who informed him they did not sell megabytes/second, only megabits. The salesperson was very confuse…

My believe was that this happen as a human error, from non technical persons (not everybody is a CCNA certified or Comptia network plus). For example people will often say give me that liter of wine, when in fact the bottle it’s 750ml and not a liter per se.

Or in the case of megabyte vs megabit, it's in fact a 125ml bottle.

I understand what you're saying, but it's a bit disappointing that the company doesn't train their salespeople to understand the bullet points they're trying to sell. This isn't really CCNA-level knowledge.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#72

Post by jackvalentine »

unlikelymordant wrote: post #68
BombNullIsland wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For example people will often say give me that liter of wine, when in fact the bottle it’s 750ml" No one has ever said this. Ever. In the history of ever. Wine and spirits in the US were sold as "fifths" or one fifth of a US gallon, equal to 757ml. This became a "metric fifth" or 750ml. No one is even slightly confused by this.

There are many countries where litre is the only unit of measurement, perhaps it happened in one of those?

I assure you that in countries where the metric system is used ordering a litre of wine you would expect to receive 1000ml.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#74

Post by Drew_ »

eli wrote: post #22
sebmellen wrote: post #17

For me, https://privacy.com has been a lifesaver in situations like this. Can't cancel a subscription? Just cancel the card. Voilà!

Don’t try that with a gym membership or similar. They will come after you.

Can you elaborate on "come after you"? I would definitely use this type of option for gym subscriptions when given the chance.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#75

Post by CWuestefeld »

gnicholas wrote: post #19
flowerlad wrote: post #8

I called to cancel. I was offered $14/month promotion, and then after I agreed to the deal and gave them credit card they said I will be charged $14 every 4 weeks. I said agreed to $14/month, that's not the same as $14 every 4 weeks, because $14/month is $168 per year, but $14 every 4 weeks is $182.49 per year. They said they will charge $14 every 4 weeks, and I decided to cancel because of their scammy offer.

For years, every AT&T and Comcast salesperson I talked with quoted me megabytes per second instead of megabits per second. They would insist that they were right if I ever asked them to clarify the units of measurement. One time the salesperson was so sure that he was right that he conferenced in a tech support person…who informed him they did not sell megabytes/second, only megabits. The salesperson was very confuse…

I've had the same conversation with Spectrum reps, as well. In fact, more typically, they don't even say "per second", it's just "megabytes".

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#76

Post by Nicksil »

dialtone wrote: post #69
mapgrep wrote: post #25

I have adopted a zen posture to this sort of hypocrisy which involves believing both these things: 1. It is good to call out hypocrisy like this article does where a publishing entity is engaged in behavior completely contrary to the behavior called for in their published words. 2. It is also good that the reporter’s journalism is sufficiently free (as in freedom) that they are able to write so independently of the b…

It's really not alright to step on the pulpit to point fingers left and right when your house is also not in order, it makes it seem more like you're trying to move forward your business agenda rather than really caring about the issue.

>It's really not alright to step on the pulpit to point fingers left and right when your house is also not in order, it makes it seem more like you're trying to move forward your business agenda rather than really caring about the issue.

What does this mean? Are you speaking to the author of the parent comment or in general? What is this un-orderliness you've alluded to?

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#77

Post by kilburn »

jackvalentine wrote: post #72
unlikelymordant wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many countries where litre is the only unit of measurement, perhaps it happened in one of those?

I assure you that in countries where the metric system is used ordering a litre of wine you would expect to receive 1000ml.

In Spain (a liter-only country very adept to wine) you can buy wine in two ways:

1. By the bottle. Bottles are usually 750ml, but 700ml and 1000ml are not that rare. In any case, you bought that bottle of that specific wine brand/year. The quantity is whatever the producer decided. The price is per bottle and quantity doesn't factor in.

2. By volume. This is only used when you buy in bulk. You go to a winery where they have huge barrels with a faucet. You can taste the wine and then buy any quantity you want (you can even bring your own container).

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#78

Post by kilburn »

WalterBright wrote: post #3

> I told the representative I wanted to cancel. Then I was offered reasons not to. I responded with “no thanks” each time. Then, I waited for the representative to reply and come back with several rounds of offers to get me not to cancel. On and on, the process went until I was finally allowed to leave. That's fairly easy to deal with. Answer every question, argument, and pitch from the representative with "please ca…

Right after the first question, someone should try replying in the lines of:

I have expressed in no unclear terms that I want to cancel my subscription and I don't want to answer any further non-essential questions about it. Any further questions that are not legally necessary to terminate our relationship will be considered usage of my professional consulting services at the rate of 10$/minute for which I will send you a bill after the call finishes. How may we proceed?

I'd love to know what would happen next.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#79

Post by eli »

Drew_ wrote: post #74
eli wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t try that with a gym membership or similar. They will come after you.

Can you elaborate on "come after you"? I would definitely use this type of option for gym subscriptions when given the chance.

Send you to collections and ding your credit or perhaps even sue you.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#80

Post by dialtone »

Nicksil wrote: post #76
dialtone wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not alright to step on the pulpit to point fingers left and right when your house is also not in order, it makes it seem more like you're trying to move forward your business agenda rather than really caring about the issue.

>It's really not alright to step on the pulpit to point fingers left and right when your house is also not in order, it makes it seem more like you're trying to move forward your business agenda rather than really caring about the issue. What does this mean? Are you speaking to the author of the parent comment or in general? What is this un-orderliness you've alluded to?

I'm speaking to the author of the comment I replied to who basically states that the article was purely good because of the topic, without having any critical eye towards it. And the un-orderliness is in the title of the article commented on, nyt has dark patterns on their site as well.

The author of the NYT piece is a member of the editorial board so he should be held to a higher standard than employees of a business that protest its practices, while probably having no power over setting them. A member of the editorial board is certainly in a more powerful position, relatively speaking, to make changes in their newspaper and surely he could have talked about the example set by the business he works for. If Google came out with PR that pointed at Apple tracking users of its phones, something that is factually true, they would be rightfully laughed at because they are the last ones that can complain that someone tracks people.

Post reply on HN