5 ms·

There are a ton of dark patterns in web design about this. - same color background - in the wrong corner (users expect the "X" in the upper right hand corner)

There are a ton of dark patterns in web design about this. - same color background - in the wrong corner (users expect the "X" in the upper right hand corner). I've seen the "X" in the wrong corner and some other icon in the right hand corner. People reflexive will click in the upper right hand corner and open the ad by mistake - I've seen where you have to click on text instead of the "X", clicking on the "X" just opens the ad - Also very small, 1-2 pixel "X" so literally one pixel off and you've opened the ad - I don't remember what company did this, but they would pop the ad and after three seconds, it would reload, all but a few pixels higher so when you're in the process of closing the window, it would reload and then you'd open the ad by mistake because the "X" is in the wrong place now. I've seen a lot more devious stuff but the sad thing is, I have decent vision. How do these dark patterns affect people who have impaired vision or other issues with their vision? How infuriating it is it for them to deal with this BS? I can't imagine.

mikeyjk 6y ago
An overlay that covers the whole area opening an add onClick. After some time the overlay is added again (incredibly annoying for video players you might want to pause)
- efreak 6y ago
  If your ad blocker can't deal with these, set z-index on the main content with a userstyle, so it stays on top. Then you might also want to use a css style to just make everything else invisible: ``` *:not(.videoContainer){ background-color: black!important; color: black!important; } img { display:none!important; } ```
netsharc 6y ago
The god damned cookie consent popups do this. The "Decline" buttons are small and grey, the "Accept all and save" are big and green. They'd show empty checkboxes/iOS-style sliders at the off position that show that you won't be getting non-essential cookies, of course when you click "Accept all" these settings get overridden.
- cgriswald 6y ago
  Not only an ad problem, but the sliders reminded me of a really bad UI feature I see everywhere: ambiguous highlighting when there are only two options.
  - 72deluxe 6y ago
    I find some of the sliders for on/off are impossible to read. You can't work out what is on or off. Windows 3.11 / 95 UI seems such a good idea by comparison to today's UIs - checkboxes with obvious tick marks or X marks in them, radio buttons, buttons that look like actual buttons, scrollbars you can see without having to flail the mouse around just for them to appear, scrollbars that go the right way when you use the mouse wheel (ok that was Windows 98), maximise buttons that actually maximised a window without having to hold alt like on macOS these days...
    - efreak 6y ago
      My dad is colorblind, and the red off/green on looks the same to him; the slight shadow showing the side the toggle is on often isn't dark enough to be obvious, especially when someone gets cute and makes the slider pill-style (the button part takes up exactly half the space, with a vertical line down the middle). I expect this to be less common with mobile OS downtime features that encourage users to get off their screens by going grayscale.
    - tomjen3 6y ago
      I don't know why everybody went to a flat design. Seriously Apple should have stuck with their it looks like things design.
Loughla 6y ago
What kills me is that the only app that I actually engage with ads is an app that has a voluntary button to see ads to support the developer. You click the 'watch ad' button, you watch a 15 second ad, or see a banner ad, and then return to the app when you close the screen. The app asks once per month if I would consider seeing an ad to support the developer. I usually watch one ad a day, as a rule, because it's the best way to do this. I've clicked on those ads, and have actually made purchases from those ads (it was for a product I was already researching and probably going to buy, but I clicked through the ad when I finally purchased it). More apps need that level of respect for their users' time.
neura 6y ago
> Also very small, 1-2 pixel "X" so literally one pixel off and you've opened the ad Fact check. You cannot make an X with anything less than 3 pixels. ;)
dragonwriter 6y ago
> 1-2 pixel "X" An x requires at least 3×3 pixels.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  Not if it's rendered on subpixels :).
  - taneq 6y ago
    Actually the minimum number of pixels to render a close box is three times the number of close boxes (ie. 3x3 for 1 close box). Any fewer pixels will not allow a functional close box to be reconstructed. This is referered to as the 'Nah-quist limit'.

mikeyjk 6y ago

An overlay that covers the whole area opening an add onClick. After some time the overlay is added again (incredibly annoying for video players you might want to pause)

efreak 6y ago
If your ad blocker can't deal with these, set z-index on the main content with a userstyle, so it stays on top. Then you might also want to use a css style to just make everything else invisible: ``` *:not(.videoContainer){ background-color: black!important; color: black!important; } img { display:none!important; } ```

netsharc 6y ago

The god damned cookie consent popups do this. The "Decline" buttons are small and grey, the "Accept all and save" are big and green. They'd show empty checkboxes/iOS-style sliders at the off position that show that you won't be getting non-essential cookies, of course when you click "Accept all" these settings get overridden.

cgriswald 6y ago
Not only an ad problem, but the sliders reminded me of a really bad UI feature I see everywhere: ambiguous highlighting when there are only two options.
- 72deluxe 6y ago
  I find some of the sliders for on/off are impossible to read. You can't work out what is on or off. Windows 3.11 / 95 UI seems such a good idea by comparison to today's UIs - checkboxes with obvious tick marks or X marks in them, radio buttons, buttons that look like actual buttons, scrollbars you can see without having to flail the mouse around just for them to appear, scrollbars that go the right way when you use the mouse wheel (ok that was Windows 98), maximise buttons that actually maximised a window without having to hold alt like on macOS these days...
  - efreak 6y ago
    My dad is colorblind, and the red off/green on looks the same to him; the slight shadow showing the side the toggle is on often isn't dark enough to be obvious, especially when someone gets cute and makes the slider pill-style (the button part takes up exactly half the space, with a vertical line down the middle). I expect this to be less common with mobile OS downtime features that encourage users to get off their screens by going grayscale.
  - tomjen3 6y ago
    I don't know why everybody went to a flat design. Seriously Apple should have stuck with their it looks like things design.

Loughla 6y ago

What kills me is that the only app that I actually engage with ads is an app that has a voluntary button to see ads to support the developer. You click the 'watch ad' button, you watch a 15 second ad, or see a banner ad, and then return to the app when you close the screen. The app asks once per month if I would consider seeing an ad to support the developer. I usually watch one ad a day, as a rule, because it's the best way to do this. I've clicked on those ads, and have actually made purchases from those ads (it was for a product I was already researching and probably going to buy, but I clicked through the ad when I finally purchased it). More apps need that level of respect for their users' time.

neura 6y ago

> Also very small, 1-2 pixel "X" so literally one pixel off and you've opened the ad Fact check. You cannot make an X with anything less than 3 pixels. ;)

dragonwriter 6y ago

> 1-2 pixel "X" An x requires at least 3×3 pixels.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
Not if it's rendered on subpixels :).
- taneq 6y ago
  Actually the minimum number of pixels to render a close box is three times the number of close boxes (ie. 3x3 for 1 close box). Any fewer pixels will not allow a functional close box to be reconstructed. This is referered to as the 'Nah-quist limit'.