7 ms·
The thing about dark patterns is that feels like an abuse of the commons. Because of scummy practices like this I am absolutely less willing to explore a site t
by someone7x 10y ago
The thing about dark patterns is that feels like an abuse of the commons. Because of scummy practices like this I am absolutely less willing to explore a site that requests my email, or buy something from a random site (I just see if it's on amazon and buy it there).
For example, a few days ago there was a Show HN about PlateJoy, which sounded really interesting. But, the only way I could learn about it was to enter my email and take a quiz. Now enters the part where the antics of countless other bad actors takes its toll on an otherwise innocent website; I decide it isn't worth the risk and move a long.
- wldcordeiro 10y agoYep, AllTrails recently went with a dark-pattern, want to see any info on the trail? Sign-up. If you don't you'll get a brief flash of the detail page before redirecting to a sign-up form.
- lpolovets 10y agoIs that a dark pattern, or poor ux?
- kordless 10y agoDoes it really matter?
- HashHishBang 10y agoYes? That is the entire point of this discussion. That just strikes me as a sign-up for more info. Granted I haven't signed up there so who knows if there are nefarious pre-checked boxes and massive ToS agreements, but signup for access to the site doesn't seem malicious.
- kordless 10y agoI really shouldn't ask leading questions, because they are technically equivalent to blaming statements. What I meant was that "it does NOT matter" whether it's a UX bug or an intentional pattern. The effects can be the same. If a company doesn't have a lot of money to produce a good UX because they spent it all on trips up to Tahoe for a "workcation", and people rely on that software, it's the same damn thing no matter how you look at it. i.e. a lack of intent is just as bad as ill intent, in some cases.
- stanmancan 10y agoRequiring someone to log in to use your site or service is not a dark pattern though. There's nothing nefarious going on there. As another poster said somewhere in this chain, if upon signing up you have to give your life away via the TOS, or there's pre-checked boxes signing you up for mailing lists, those are dark patterns. Simply requiring a user sign up is not.
- EdHominem 10y agoThat's not what the users say. Sure, it could be darker. But when you see a bit of a crummy pattern you usually walk away instead of checking out just how bad it could get.
- stanmancan 10y agoThen the 'users' are incorrectly using the term dark pattern; most likely because they don't really know what one is. "A Dark Pattern is a user interface that has been carefully crafted to trick users into doing things." Simply making a user sign up to use your service is hardly a 'carefully crafted trick'.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- chrismcb 10y agoYes it does matter. A bug or poor design can be fixed, while a dark pattern is intentional. Yes, the end result to the user is the same, but long term the it's a difference.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- rfrey 10y agoThat does not sound like it's trying to trick you. They're offering something valuable in return for your email address. That is what every startup guru advises companies to do. Apparently the value wasn't high enough for you to sign up. That's fine. But why is it a "dark pattern"?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- throwanem 10y agoBecause you can't fairly evaluate the offering if you can't see it until after you've already given away the item of value (in this case, your email address) in exchange for which the offering is made.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago> That is what every startup guru advises companies to do. A lot of things that "startup guru" advise are light shades of scams. A honest business deal is when a customer is given enough information to evaluate the proposal and then gets an option to decide - without influencing - to enter the transaction. One needs to keep that in mind. In this case - it's what 'throwanem replied - "you can't fairly evaluate the offering if you can't see it until after you've already given away the item of value".
- rfrey 10y agoI just looked at AllTrails, and it's pretty clear what the value is - you get to download and print the maps, and use them on your phone. I appreciate what you're saying about an honest transaction, but "dark patterns" is a useful term that is being diluted to apply to any company that doesn't offer everything for nothing. If asking you to create an account to use the product is a "dark pattern", what do we call moving buttons to capture accidental tricks, getting you to open your contact list with tricky wording and spamming everyone, etc? Surely those aren't the same as "please create an account to use our product"?
- 10y ago
- notatoad 10y agoThis is basically what any discussion on dark patterns i have ever seen devolves into: "a service i use has an interaction i don't like. it's a dark pattern." the whole term is basically a meaningless buzzword now. requiring an email address to access a service is no more of a dark pattern than requiring payment to access a service. they're taking something of value in exchange for providing something of value. it's only a "dark pattern" if they trick you into providing your email address somehow.
- nitrogen 10y agoLoading the content then redirecting to or popping over an uncloseable email form is a bait and switch, especially if you are coming from a search engine result.
- cmdrfred 10y agoExactly, its a SEO scam. I'm sure Google will figure out a way to stop it and give them the 40th page result they deserve.
- wldcordeiro 10y agoAlso it used to not be this way, there were more details hidden behind the login but the general info used to be accessible with no login, it's only in the recent months that they switched to hiding most content.
- angersock 10y agoThere is no guarantee that what they're providing will be anything of value--and in fact, usually isn't. Emails on the other hand can reliably fetch prices/be put to use.
- sliverstorm 10y agoIt's my impression that a dark pattern is not so much a con, and more like when a ballot is intentionally printed in such a way that a voter intending to vote for Obama is misled and unwittingly marks the ballot for Romney instead, or vica versa.
- sliverstorm 10y agoThey're in part a community-driven content site though, that's understandable. The trails, and feedback about them, is all user-derived.
- shostack 10y agoIf they are showing one thing to users, and another to search engines, that is expressly prohibited by Google and you can report them. This is what got Expertsexchange.com busted way back in the day.
- mech4bg 10y agoIs that true? Most pay-walled newspapers work this way.
- shostack 10y agoMost pay-walled newspapers show you some content initially (which is what is getting indexed), or give you X number of free articles before hitting you with it. For others (like WSJ), they offer a "Web" link of some sort that they bury the hell out of, but that technically exists and is visible to users. So people from search engines don't get hit with the paywall, but anyone from social, email, referral, etc. does.
- vlunkr 10y agoI don't think Amazon is completely innocent either. I signed up for prime accidentally recently because EVERY time you buy something they try to sell you prime for a year and I guess I misread something. They canceled and refunded after an email, but it was still obnoxious.