3 ms·
This doesn't change what the parent comment said. Opt-out is inherently a dark pattern. The hope is that the person installing the software doesn't actually rea
by throwntoday 4y ago
This doesn't change what the parent comment said. Opt-out is inherently a dark pattern. The hope is that the person installing the software doesn't actually read and uncheck the box. It's no different to "install bing toolbar" for example being pre-checked and snuck in to directx.
- alkonaut 4y ago> The hope is that the person installing the software doesn't actually read and uncheck the box Yes. Because you have the "don't care" group being the important group. The users are split into a small group being positive (The would-opt-ins) and a small group being negative (the people arguing it must be opt in) and a large group who don't care. The central "don't care" group is so large that the data is almost useless without them - i.e. you could just as well not have the system at all if you were going to do a full opt-in. So the unchecked box alternative really isn't an alternative.
- Lio 4y agoYou've missed out a group there, it's: * Would-opt-ins * Would-opt-outs * Don't-cares * Did-not-know-that-google-are-going-to-run-telemetrys By making it opt-out Google will be conveniently hoovering up the people that would say objects if they knew along with the don't cares.
- alkonaut 4y agoYes my 3-group would be the case for the checkbox-during-installer-of-desktop-app.