4 ms·

While my own habits agree with you, there’s a gold nugget in the replies to address accidents: > Just do it, but allow it to be un-done. No matter what the ac

While my own habits agree with you, there’s a gold nugget in the replies to address accidents: > Just do it, but allow it to be un-done. No matter what the action. This might mean rearchitecting that interactive flow. It might even need deeper rearchitecting for other tasks. But “allow undo” should definitely be an option for “action on press” flows.

eterm 2y ago
See also "Never use a warning" (2007): https://alistapart.com/article/neveruseawarning/ https://alistapart.com/article/neveruseawarning/
- tialaramex 2y ago
  Yes. Humans experience regret, "consent" is mostly a trick we use to get people who experience regret to blame themselves, not us, for what happened. We should prefer (and in software this will almost always be possible) to undo the regrettable action instead of demanding consent. In some cases we can do even better and prevent the regret itself with "Brick wall UI". Brick wall UI is a design where the thing that you definitely don't want to do isn't possible. As designers we have to put more effort in to ensure that this only arises where it's genuinely never what you wanted to do, otherwise it's just incredibly annoying. The idea in Brick wall UI is that the user's experience is potentially, especially initially, the same frustration as if it was broken. Why won't the barrier open so I can drive my truck under the bridge? Why can't I use my login token to access this banking site and see my transfer details? And maybe, eventually, sat at the Brick wall UI, the user realises why and is glad. "Oh! My truck won't actually fit under the bridge, I just avoided an expensive mistake" or "Wait, this isn't my bank it's fakebank.example, it's a bloody phishing scam". Or maybe they don't, for hours, or days, or weeks, but since it was never correct that's actually fine.
  - NackerHughes 2y ago
    Why would a fake bank phishing scam site have a brick wall UI? Surely they’d want to make it as easy to enter your bank details as possible.
    - tialaramex 2y ago
      But the scammers don't control your UI, the UI belongs to the browser. The Brick Wall I was particularly thinking about is WebAuthn. There could (but shouldn't) be a UI where I can say Oops, silly site has used the wrong URL, lets provide my real site credentials anyway. I can give the scammers my real credentials, they can steal all my money everybody is happy. Oh except me, I guess I'm miserable - but only after I realise what happened. Instead there's a brick wall here, WebAuthn can't authenticate to the bad guys. I'm sat there until I either realise that it's a scam or I give up and maybe phone the bank about their apparently atrocious UI (and then maybe realise it's a scam).
      - lambdaxyzw 2y ago
        >I'm sat there until I either realise that it's a scam or I give up Well, there are ways to do this (for an easy example, just edit your hosts file). But the barrier of entry is high enough that a non technical person will give up even if they're completely oblivious.
pseudalopex 2y ago
Undo should be standard for act on press and act on release flows.
- eru 2y ago
  Undo is a good standard for nearly all actions in nearly all software. (The main exception I can think of being games were not having an undo can often be integral to the experience. Eg Counterstrike should definitely shoot on press, and not allow you to undo bullets.)
  - flysand7 2y ago
    Not gonna lie, undoing bullets sounds like a fun gameplay mechanic
    - eru 2y ago
      Oh, definitely. But that would be a very different game, not Counterstrike.
eviks 2y ago
There are actions without undo like "Send form data" (unless it's a fake send like in some emails). Though also can be rearchitected...

eterm 2y ago

See also "Never use a warning" (2007): https://alistapart.com/article/neveruseawarning/ https://alistapart.com/article/neveruseawarning/

tialaramex 2y ago
Yes. Humans experience regret, "consent" is mostly a trick we use to get people who experience regret to blame themselves, not us, for what happened. We should prefer (and in software this will almost always be possible) to undo the regrettable action instead of demanding consent. In some cases we can do even better and prevent the regret itself with "Brick wall UI". Brick wall UI is a design where the thing that you definitely don't want to do isn't possible. As designers we have to put more effort in to ensure that this only arises where it's genuinely never what you wanted to do, otherwise it's just incredibly annoying. The idea in Brick wall UI is that the user's experience is potentially, especially initially, the same frustration as if it was broken. Why won't the barrier open so I can drive my truck under the bridge? Why can't I use my login token to access this banking site and see my transfer details? And maybe, eventually, sat at the Brick wall UI, the user realises why and is glad. "Oh! My truck won't actually fit under the bridge, I just avoided an expensive mistake" or "Wait, this isn't my bank it's fakebank.example, it's a bloody phishing scam". Or maybe they don't, for hours, or days, or weeks, but since it was never correct that's actually fine.
- NackerHughes 2y ago
  Why would a fake bank phishing scam site have a brick wall UI? Surely they’d want to make it as easy to enter your bank details as possible.
  - tialaramex 2y ago
    But the scammers don't control your UI, the UI belongs to the browser. The Brick Wall I was particularly thinking about is WebAuthn. There could (but shouldn't) be a UI where I can say Oops, silly site has used the wrong URL, lets provide my real site credentials anyway. I can give the scammers my real credentials, they can steal all my money everybody is happy. Oh except me, I guess I'm miserable - but only after I realise what happened. Instead there's a brick wall here, WebAuthn can't authenticate to the bad guys. I'm sat there until I either realise that it's a scam or I give up and maybe phone the bank about their apparently atrocious UI (and then maybe realise it's a scam).
    - lambdaxyzw 2y ago
      >I'm sat there until I either realise that it's a scam or I give up Well, there are ways to do this (for an easy example, just edit your hosts file). But the barrier of entry is high enough that a non technical person will give up even if they're completely oblivious.

pseudalopex 2y ago

Undo should be standard for act on press and act on release flows.

eru 2y ago
Undo is a good standard for nearly all actions in nearly all software. (The main exception I can think of being games were not having an undo can often be integral to the experience. Eg Counterstrike should definitely shoot on press, and not allow you to undo bullets.)
- flysand7 2y ago
  Not gonna lie, undoing bullets sounds like a fun gameplay mechanic
  - eru 2y ago
    Oh, definitely. But that would be a very different game, not Counterstrike.

eviks 2y ago

There are actions without undo like "Send form data" (unless it's a fake send like in some emails). Though also can be rearchitected...