3 ms·

The only way this should work is by requesting a user input that explicitly comes from the user. No auto-popup. Right now push are so abused that I always disab

The only way this should work is by requesting a user input that explicitly comes from the user. No auto-popup. Right now push are so abused that I always disable it on every parent/friend/cat browser.

Dalewyn 4y ago
But then it wouldn't be a "push" notification. It's called "push" because the service is "pushing" the notification onto the user, the user has no agency in the matter aside from straight up blocking/disabling them.
- jwestbury 4y ago
  No, it's called push because of push/pull architecture. You can subscribe to have notifications pushed, which is a way you, as a user, can control the behaviour.
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    You essentially repeated what I said, other than implying the user had a choice in getting notifications pushed to him to start with.
    - Jcowell 4y ago
      The difference is the Initiation. Push notifications have nothing to do with the platform enforcing push upon the user. Your comment made it seem like it was.
perryizgr8 4y ago
And the website should get no indication about the sate of the notification settings.
SquareWheel 4y ago
Most browser vendors already do, or will soon require a user gesture to initiate. That doesn't mean that abuse will disappear, but it should help. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Notifications_API/Using_the_Notifications_API#requesting_permission https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Notificatio...
- input_sh 4y ago
  This fixes nothing. Without this: you get a browser popup immediately on page load. With this: you get a popup within the website, which will then trigger the browser popup if you miss the tiny (x). As someone pointed out already, the only possible fix is for websites to somehow not know whether you've enabled them or not.
  - kroltan 4y ago
    Yep, classic issue of usability vs abuse. To solve abuse, the browser could pretend to comply by not returning error codes but doing nothing for the user. However this would mean that websites with a legitimate use for the feature (say, an email client or whatever) would have degraded usability, kind of how Mac apps have to tell you to go to the system settings and allow them certain permissions.
  - brycedriesenga 4y ago
    At least within the website, we'll likely be able to use Ublock Origin, etc. to block a lot of 'em
nicoburns 4y ago
I believe this is how it works on iOS. Only apps that have been added to the home screen by a user can request notifications.

Dalewyn 4y ago

But then it wouldn't be a "push" notification. It's called "push" because the service is "pushing" the notification onto the user, the user has no agency in the matter aside from straight up blocking/disabling them.

jwestbury 4y ago
No, it's called push because of push/pull architecture. You can subscribe to have notifications pushed, which is a way you, as a user, can control the behaviour.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  You essentially repeated what I said, other than implying the user had a choice in getting notifications pushed to him to start with.
  - Jcowell 4y ago
    The difference is the Initiation. Push notifications have nothing to do with the platform enforcing push upon the user. Your comment made it seem like it was.

perryizgr8 4y ago

And the website should get no indication about the sate of the notification settings.

SquareWheel 4y ago

Most browser vendors already do, or will soon require a user gesture to initiate. That doesn't mean that abuse will disappear, but it should help. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Notifications_API/Using_the_Notifications_API#requesting_permission https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Notificatio...

input_sh 4y ago
This fixes nothing. Without this: you get a browser popup immediately on page load. With this: you get a popup within the website, which will then trigger the browser popup if you miss the tiny (x). As someone pointed out already, the only possible fix is for websites to somehow not know whether you've enabled them or not.
- kroltan 4y ago
  Yep, classic issue of usability vs abuse. To solve abuse, the browser could pretend to comply by not returning error codes but doing nothing for the user. However this would mean that websites with a legitimate use for the feature (say, an email client or whatever) would have degraded usability, kind of how Mac apps have to tell you to go to the system settings and allow them certain permissions.
- brycedriesenga 4y ago
  At least within the website, we'll likely be able to use Ublock Origin, etc. to block a lot of 'em

nicoburns 4y ago

I believe this is how it works on iOS. Only apps that have been added to the home screen by a user can request notifications.