3 ms·
Of course it's worth it! You gained valuable insight on which sites utilise a particular dark pattern, and that they probably use others. I don't bother clicki
by julianlam 6y ago
Of course it's worth it! You gained valuable insight on which sites utilise a particular dark pattern, and that they probably use others.
I don't bother clicking on TechCrunch articles for this reason.
- DarthGhandi 6y agoIt's a status page, doesn't seem to be a dark pattern intended to keep you engaged and garner clicks, more likely just badly written. If anything they'd probably want you not visiting it more.
- schrodinger 6y agoIncompetence, not malice. Who would dark pattern their status page to keep you on it longer—def an accident.
- BoorishBears 6y agoWhy are there two comments back to back missing the fact they're obviously referring to this part of the comment: > News sites injecting their homepage in history on an article sometimes make me wonder if it's worth it. They even bring up a news site as an example.
- dogecoinbase 6y agoI'm not going to assert actual malice, but I think that at Google's scale we can go further than incompetence to bare negligence.
- tdy721 6y agoHow about canary?
- pmontra 6y agoI don't bother clicking TechCrunch because it redirects to https://guce.advertising.com/collectIdentifiers?sessionId=3_cc-session_<a https://guce.advertising.com/collectIdentifiers?sessionId=3_... uuid> and one of the privacy plugins on my Firefox stops me there.