3 ms·

Why not just outlaw dark patterns in general as deceptive practices? All this focus on fixing particular companies or government mandating software architectur

by zepto 6y ago

Why not just outlaw dark patterns in general as deceptive practices? All this focus on fixing particular companies or government mandating software architecture seems like it just gets the government more and more invovled while not doing anything to prevent the actual abuses.

mindslight 6y ago
It's impossible to formally define dark patterns, especially when trying to except traditional dark patterns (recurring sales, coupons, strategically placed roasting chickens, etc). And so any attempt to do that will necessarily "get the government more and more involved". Either through some administrative body that decides whether a certain thing is a "dark pattern", or through judicial remedies ("Here is your 57 cent media credit because Amazon lied about shipping cutoff times. They admit no wrongdoing but promise to never do it again"). Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. Amazon could even choose whatever structure they want, as long as it is documented and versioned. Both approaches aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm not arguing against the former. I just don't hold out hope for it to create meaningful reform - centralized bodies are just as likely to bless abusive practices.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. That is software architecture.
  - mindslight 6y ago
    That's like calling a bike shed "civil engineering". I don't know what point you're making with the term "software architecture" other than trying to make it sound burdensome.
    - zepto 6y ago
      My point is that once you mandate that, then forever all stores must be architected around providing this web API, based on technology assumptions frozen in law. Building a P2P or distributed store, not based on a central website, just as an example, would be illegal. This is just one example of how the future would be encumbered forever based on a 90’s software architecture becoming enshrined in law. The web as it is today is not some endpoint in software evolution. A Government mandated API is literally the government regulating software architecture.
      - mindslight 6y ago
        A law would be horribly broken if it said something like "all stores must have a web API". Alternatives of "web stores must have a web API" or "all businesses with a digital UI must have a published API offering the same features" wouldn't succumb to that. That's why I take issue with the word "architecture". If a business has chosen to offer a web storefront, a web API can be supplied right alongside that. There's no need for any "architecture" mandate - the business has chosen the architecture, and the law would mandate accessibility. Also a P2P/distributed store would itself be defined by an open API, making the issue moot.
        zepto 6y ago
        > A law would be horribly broken if it said something like "all stores must have a web API". Alternatives of "web stores must have a web API" or "all businesses with a digital UI must have a published API offering the same features" wouldn't succumb to that. There would have to be a lot more than that. Who would govern API quality, what about service levels, how about authentication and sign up? Data formats, etc. Would these all be up to the vendor? What happens when there is a bug in the API? > That's why I take issue with the word "architecture". If a business has chosen to offer a web storefront, a web API can be supplied right alongside that. No, see above. It just isn’t that simple. > There's no need for any "architecture" mandate - the business has chosen the architecture, and the law would mandate accessibility. Well this isn’t what you said before. > Also a P2P/distributed store would itself be defined by an open API, making the issue moot. Not at all. There is no reason at all for distributed store network would need to have an open API. It could operate in terms of user facing pages for people to interact with - or be like a network of chat bots. You are basing this entire hypothesis on the basis that computer architectures are what you imagine them to be today, which is an invalid assumption.

by zepto 6y ago

mindslight 6y ago

It's impossible to formally define dark patterns, especially when trying to except traditional dark patterns (recurring sales, coupons, strategically placed roasting chickens, etc). And so any attempt to do that will necessarily "get the government more and more involved". Either through some administrative body that decides whether a certain thing is a "dark pattern", or through judicial remedies ("Here is your 57 cent media credit because Amazon lied about shipping cutoff times. They admit no wrongdoing but promise to never do it again"). Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. Amazon could even choose whatever structure they want, as long as it is documented and versioned. Both approaches aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm not arguing against the former. I just don't hold out hope for it to create meaningful reform - centralized bodies are just as likely to bless abusive practices.

zepto 6y ago
> Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. That is software architecture.
- mindslight 6y ago
  That's like calling a bike shed "civil engineering". I don't know what point you're making with the term "software architecture" other than trying to make it sound burdensome.
  - zepto 6y ago
    My point is that once you mandate that, then forever all stores must be architected around providing this web API, based on technology assumptions frozen in law. Building a P2P or distributed store, not based on a central website, just as an example, would be illegal. This is just one example of how the future would be encumbered forever based on a 90’s software architecture becoming enshrined in law. The web as it is today is not some endpoint in software evolution. A Government mandated API is literally the government regulating software architecture.
    - mindslight 6y ago
      A law would be horribly broken if it said something like "all stores must have a web API". Alternatives of "web stores must have a web API" or "all businesses with a digital UI must have a published API offering the same features" wouldn't succumb to that. That's why I take issue with the word "architecture". If a business has chosen to offer a web storefront, a web API can be supplied right alongside that. There's no need for any "architecture" mandate - the business has chosen the architecture, and the law would mandate accessibility. Also a P2P/distributed store would itself be defined by an open API, making the issue moot.
      - zepto 6y ago
        > A law would be horribly broken if it said something like "all stores must have a web API". Alternatives of "web stores must have a web API" or "all businesses with a digital UI must have a published API offering the same features" wouldn't succumb to that. There would have to be a lot more than that. Who would govern API quality, what about service levels, how about authentication and sign up? Data formats, etc. Would these all be up to the vendor? What happens when there is a bug in the API? > That's why I take issue with the word "architecture". If a business has chosen to offer a web storefront, a web API can be supplied right alongside that. No, see above. It just isn’t that simple. > There's no need for any "architecture" mandate - the business has chosen the architecture, and the law would mandate accessibility. Well this isn’t what you said before. > Also a P2P/distributed store would itself be defined by an open API, making the issue moot. Not at all. There is no reason at all for distributed store network would need to have an open API. It could operate in terms of user facing pages for people to interact with - or be like a network of chat bots. You are basing this entire hypothesis on the basis that computer architectures are what you imagine them to be today, which is an invalid assumption.