[HN Gopher] How I Experience Web Today
___________________________________________________________________
How I Experience Web Today
Author : mrestko
Score : 424 points
Date : 2021-08-23 18:32 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (how-i-experience-web-today.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (how-i-experience-web-today.com)
| wibblewobble123 wrote:
| You should also add blank text until the pointless web font
| loads.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Inaccurate, loads far too fast.
| Yeri wrote:
| "I don't care about cookies" [1] on Firefox breaks the website
| (ie nothing happens).
|
| [1] https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/
| dormento wrote:
| Could not proceed after the article, which is somehow actually
| really dang realistic.
| maccolgan wrote:
| Do you have uBlock Origin enabled by any chance?
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I had to turn ublock off to keep going after the first click,
| which is in fact an accurate depiction of the web experience.
| untoxicness wrote:
| Indeed. We can only hope this is an intentional self-
| referential joke.
| [deleted]
| jandrese wrote:
| I allowed scripts from cdn.jsdeliver.net and that was enough to
| get it going. Way less painful than getting an embedded third
| party video widget working.
| gdsdfe wrote:
| It really is so freaking frustrating, browsing the web these days
| max1cc wrote:
| The last part was a very nice touch
| jason0597 wrote:
| I _literally_ laughed out loud when I heard my Thinkpad 's fan
| start spinning up! This is just too accurate :(
| jl6 wrote:
| This is what happens when you use an application framework
| (HTML+CSS+JS) as a document format.
|
| All those dynamic moving fancy interactive elements are great for
| actual applications. But as a solution for transmitting plain old
| information, web technology is now a raging garbage fire. I've
| stopped publishing my site in HTML at all.
|
| The web needs to rediscover document formats.
| gfodor wrote:
| The very last thing that I saw on this site got me to laugh out
| loud. I'll leave it at that to not ruin it. Genius.
| zem wrote:
| same :) came here to see if anyone else had commented on it
| autoexec wrote:
| Go ahead and ruin it for me. I got as far as a fake article
| with two giant text boxes that couldn't be closed and had non-
| working send/submit buttons. If anything exists past this, it
| isn't loading for me.
| beprogrammed wrote:
| Same, literally laughed out loud.
| danuker wrote:
| This pushes my buttons indeed.
|
| But I also ran across some sites messing with the history, so
| they take you to a different site when you click "back".
|
| I am especially worried about pushState and replaceState.
|
| https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/History_API...
| titzer wrote:
| Is it just me or has Youtube screwed something up here? About
| 1/3rd chance that the back button doesn't do anything on the
| last Youtube page in Safari.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Wait, can any webdevs explain a legitimate use for these
| features? Because my (admittedly uninformed) mind can only
| think of bad uses...
| throwthere wrote:
| Routing in single-page applications relies heavily on the
| history API I think.
| tester756 wrote:
| not realistic
|
| lacks of giant pop-up on google search page about cookies,
| privacy or something that appears whenever you open google in new
| instance of porno mode
| yetanother-1 wrote:
| Lovely and accurate
| juliend2 wrote:
| Please put some open graph data so it's more enticing to click on
| when shared in social networks. (which I just did on linkedin)
| [deleted]
| NiceWayToDoIT wrote:
| Idea: What if we had a search engine that would search only web
| sites without ads...
|
| It could have some type of "readability / usability / user
| friendliness rating" (score 0-10) ...
| ksangeelee wrote:
| I did something along those lines as a proof of concept, seeded
| with links harvested from this site.
|
| http://kakapo.susa.net:8080/cfs/
|
| A similar (and in my opinion more viable) approach is
| Marginalia Search. This down-scores pages with a large number
| of scripts, among other heuristics.
|
| https://search.marginalia.nu/
| o2l wrote:
| Couldn't see anything annoying on Brave browser except the
| overlay on article page.
|
| I have much more appreciation for Brave today and how it molds my
| daily browsing experience.
| Lammy wrote:
| Needs more 100%-viewport-height ad blocks between the content
| paragraphs.
| rafaelturk wrote:
| Kudos for the last part!
| allenu wrote:
| Since we're all commenting on what's missing, here's another
| missing thing: you scroll down to the end of the article and a
| totally unrelated article begins underneath it.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| ... immediately overwriting the URL in your address bar, so at
| the very moment you're most likely to share or bookmark the
| article you've just read, you can't.
| n4bz0r wrote:
| These non-clickable "ads" have some weird therapeutic effect on
| me. I tap on them, nothing happens, and I feel relief. Even share
| buttons don't work. This site genuinely makes me happy! Things
| you never knew you needed.
| [deleted]
| dsego wrote:
| Had to turn off ublock origin to experience it.
| handrous wrote:
| This is less-bad than the real thing.
|
| [EDIT] I think I figured out the main difference: this lets me
| imagine that more than 10% of the "content" isn't also SEO
| garbage, and has actual value.
|
| [EDIT AGAIN] What it really needs is a _giant_ sticky header that
| hides when scrolling down but pops up the second you scroll up
| _at all_ , obscuring all the stuff you were scrolling up to see.
| rchaud wrote:
| Those giant dynamic headers are the worst. If you try to save
| the page to PDF, those headers will block the content at the
| top of the page.
|
| I've taken to using the element zapper on Ublock Origin to
| remove them. Sometimes I worry that it'll break the navigation,
| but then again I rarely come back to sites like those.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _[EDIT] I think I figured out the main difference: this lets
| me imagine that more than 10% of the "content" isn't also SEO
| garbage, and has actual value._
|
| Yup. I think the author forgot to color the main article text,
| and to label it "also an ad".
| thatjoeoverthr wrote:
| Almost. It needs an ad that fills entirely the upper half of the
| screen, and stays with you while you scroll.
| bruce343434 wrote:
| Nice touch that you need to disable the ad blocker to get the
| cookie privacy thing to show up.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| Porn sites used to be the worst offenders with popups etc,
| ironically they are MUCH better than most newspapers now. No
| wonder people are watching more porn.
| westoncb wrote:
| I love the concept here (nice implementation too)
|
| Removing the 'content' and just showing the structure of these
| annoying web elements in isolation has an interesting effect:
|
| our minds typically do the exact opposite (to a certain
| extent)--the showcased elements are repeated so often they get
| partly filtered from experience: our minds know there's nothing
| interesting to them; a stored and practiced routine can be put on
| autoplay without conscious attention.
|
| So the page serves to exactly invert that filter and highlight
| these elements that increasingly vanish[1] from our experience in
| response to repeated exposure.
|
| [1] aside from a persistent low intensity feeling of
| annoyance/frustration of course
| nathias wrote:
| try watching TV, I propose something like a law of technology:
| 'every technology that can be used to squeeze profit out of
| people is getting unusable in a very short amount of time'
| chpmrc wrote:
| That is not _at all_ how I experience the web today.
|
| I also get annoyingly loud and flashy autoplaying videos...
| pizzapim wrote:
| Had to turn javascript on to read an article, very realistic.
| 4e530344963049 wrote:
| https://trimread.org/ helps with this.
| floren wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=4e530344963049 take a
| break.
| beprogrammed wrote:
| Out of curiosity I took a look at his links, there actually
| pretty good. Strips out all the crud from articles and gives
| you some stats on how much smaller it made them.
|
| https://trimread.org/
|
| I don't know how you would shrink this article in particular,
| but for your standard news site, seems to work quite well.
|
| As an example I fed the mosquito article from earlier into it
| and got this back. https://trimread.org/articles/437/info
|
| Size went from 3.49 MB to 124 kB, the requests went from 210
| to 6 and the load time went from 4.67 sec to 0.26 sec. Pretty
| good.
| pupdogg wrote:
| How did we get here? Does any and everything ultimately get
| absorbed by the marketing department?
| G3rn0ti wrote:
| Because maintaining web sites and services cost money. And
| making money on the web is still non-trivial. That's because
| the only way to make money is either by the subscription model
| or by the add revenue model. Since nobody likes to pay for many
| subscriptions in parallel, the add revenue model is the
| dominating one.
|
| If there was an easy micro-payment solution on the web this
| could make it more accessible and enjoyable again. This what
| the web3 movement is all about:
| https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/what-is-web3.
|
| With in-browser cryptographic wallets like Metamask, Ethereum's
| proposed token economy and the current generation of ,,Dapps"
| we got quite a bit closer to that vision. Web3 has the added
| benefit to eradicate the need for password managers because
| your public key becomes your identity.
| cmorgan31 wrote:
| At most companies? No. The vast majority of data siphoned isn't
| being actioned upon by most systems. The more mature data
| driven organizations will have multiple teams between data and
| marketing to ensure it is business ready which is code for
| getting rid of the shit data.
| jandrese wrote:
| Money.
|
| The web was great until someone said "I love this, but how do
| we make money with it?"
| throwawayswede wrote:
| Not really imo.
|
| It may make sense in the short term, but in the long term
| these websites are losing customers, ie money. Online
| advertising is a failed business model. All those companies
| that started like this and succeeded quickly realized this
| and are constantly trying to pivot or have done so already.
|
| I'd say the main reason for the crap web we have nowadays is:
| lazy people trying to get rich quick. There's nothing wrong
| with wanting to make money online, like people selling books,
| educational courses, retail in general.
|
| What pisses me off are people who want it quick and with no
| work. There are literally millions of people who think that
| they can just throw together a website (read shopify
| account), enable drop-shipping through some magic shitty
| plugin they neither know or care anything about, and suddenly
| bags of money will descend upon them while they're drinking
| coffee, eating poached eggs at some hipster coffee shop, and
| posting trash on any of the grams. This fails of course and
| some give up while others resort to scams. This is where
| scummy marketing people shine. They "run the numbers" and
| decide to buy some bullshit fivver SEO service that litters
| the shit out of some keywords or engage in some other so dark
| of patterns that make those million-and-one cookie consent
| boxes seem innocent. Now take this and multiply it by
| hundreds of thousands of people over the last decade and a
| half (probably even more) who are stuck in a loop of seeing
| some bullshit "success story" on facebook of some random dude
| who's now a millionaire from selling wallets from china,
| wanting to do the same but are lazy and know nothing about
| any of the fields involved, try to scam, mostly failing, and
| repeat.
| [deleted]
| dgudkov wrote:
| Nothing on the internet is free and has never been. If it
| appears free that's because somebody pays for it with time,
| money, hardware, or lost opportunities.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Okay, but that's true of everything. The spirit of the
| question is, why is the web especially egregious?
| dredmorbius wrote:
| An admirable attempt.
|
| But nowhere near sufficient.
|
| - Not _NEARLY_ enough link-litter (social links).
|
| - No Taboola Chumbox. SAD! PATHETIC!!!
|
| - Needs a CTA interruption about 15--30s after landing on the
| payload page.
|
| - Needs a useless hero image.
|
| - Needs more interstitial nags within the article itself. In bold
| and annoying context.
|
| - Needs more social links after the byline.
|
| Yes, today's web is an utter and complete clusterfuck.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| - No sounds
|
| - The page wasn't jumping around enough
|
| OK for the effort, 2/5
| rchaud wrote:
| - Social Share buttons served by a third party script loaded
| with trackers. Bonus points if they include the usually
| pathetic number of likes and retweets.
| wisethrowaway wrote:
| - CAPTCHA
|
| - cloudflare redirections
|
| - Affiliate links to Amazon
|
| ... to read a minimally informative article.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Excellent! I really should have come up w/ both CAPTCHA and
| Cloudflare, they're my banes.
|
| - Carousel
|
| - Pagination
|
| - "Click for full article" link
|
| - Autoplay video
|
| - _Separate_ autoplay background audio.
| titzer wrote:
| They forgot search ads!
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Lol a few years ago I did a full-page capture of a web article.
| 60% of space is just ads, with actual content sprinkled among the
| minefield. The rate has only worsened since then.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| That's about the traditional ratio of the adverts-to-newshole
| in newspapers.
|
| In the past few years, the (very much suffering) principle
| local daily began falling far below this level. During the
| first wave of COVID-19, there were days with virtually no
| advertising at all.
|
| On the one hand, that made for less distraction. But knowing
| that ad revenue is the mainstay of newspaper revenues, it was
| terrifying. The bleeding has continued, and the household
| eventually cancelled its subscription (something I'd long
| advocated for).
| rtcoms wrote:
| As per new trend even the content is advertisement
| frompdx wrote:
| I thought the popup with _Changes you made may not be saved._
| when hitting the back button was a nice tough. All of this is
| 100% true. I rarely make it all the way through the soft content
| barriers sites that really do this. I agree with others, this
| works too well and isn 't nearly as bad as the real thing.
| fogof wrote:
| I opened the link, saw the article, and was trying to figure out
| what point was trying to be made.
|
| Then I opened it in incognito mode and it was making a point
| about the commoditization of the web.
|
| Just use browser extensions, folks.
| alanbernstein wrote:
| Would you care to share some useful extensions for these
| problems?
| shakezula wrote:
| _Every day we stray further from the light_
| nrvn wrote:
| Does it git?
|
| Based on the comments here this website badly needs contributions
| from people who are eager to reflect the real UX of the modern
| web.
| evanfarrar wrote:
| They forgot to include the thing where you scroll down to fit as
| much of the article on one screen and then an ad loads in bumping
| the article off screen and then the ad disappears again if you
| scroll up.
| eveningsteps wrote:
| Very bitter and to the point. I regularly wonder, do the people
| who want features like these installed -- feedback form, "support
| chat" windows of various degrees of fakeness, subscription offer
| popups jumping in your face, and other absolutely baffling
| obstacles -- really use their own web sites? Have they ever had
| to?
| pjerem wrote:
| As someone who used to work for one of those companies selling
| a << support chat >> platform, no, they don't.
|
| The marketing and sales departments never targeted the
| editorial/dev team of a website/company but directly the sales
| department or an upper management department of the potential
| new customer.
|
| Chances are that the developers of those websites have to
| suffer those bullshit integrations as much as you do. And they
| also are asked to integrate them.
| ratww wrote:
| Those things are often added using Google Tag Manager, so
| developers (and anyone else seeing non-production pages)
| normally don't see them.
|
| Funny story: at my previous job the widgets were disabled
| "forever" from the site (via a cookie) once you logged with
| your company email. Marketing and marketing devs had emails
| in another domain to test their widgets.
| eitland wrote:
| As long as there is an actual live person who can help me
| behind that chat I actually appreciate it.
|
| I used the chat solution of my broadband provider just a couple
| of weeks ago and it was a really good experience.
|
| Also, as a former support technician I far prefer text from
| both sides of the table.
| Minor49er wrote:
| Very often, they do not, especially if the site creators are
| not a part of their own target demographic
| krono wrote:
| A website is a tool, a means to an end. The purpose of chat
| popups or feedback forms is to further a business goal, not to
| increase the website's usability.
| thatjoeoverthr wrote:
| Is the business goal to get you to click the back button?
| krono wrote:
| I myself am blocking these annoyances with an adblocker so
| I'm in the same boat as you.
|
| That being said, the value that these patterns are gaining
| the businesses that employ them, must outweigh the value
| lost from people who are so annoyed that they take their
| business elsewhere.
|
| It is how it is, unfortunately.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| No, the business goal is to lie, trick, cheat and steal, to
| fuck a potential customer over so they part with their
| money.
|
| That the customer may not be satisfied afterwards doesn't
| matter - there are plenty of mitigation strategies, such as
| lock-in effects, playing off sunk cost fallacy, or drowning
| negative feedback on third-party sites with bought ratings,
| reviews and social media likes.
|
| Seeing a site like this should light an immediate warning
| site in your head, telling you that you don't want to be on
| the business end of their business goals.
| diordiderot wrote:
| You clearly don't understand capitalism.
|
| The business just provided the most value(tm) to the
| customer at that moment in time
| TchoBeer wrote:
| Their customers being ad companies
| ivanovb wrote:
| The content should be just the title repeated a few times, but
| phrased differently.
| jandrese wrote:
| Actual content was above the fold, it's already better than
| many websites.
| coffeecat wrote:
| Where's the auto-playing video that you can't get rid of, and
| which jumps into the sidebar and moves down along with you when
| you try to scroll past it?
| allenu wrote:
| Yup, and it has a close button that conveniently appears right
| beneath the scrollbar.
| pbourke wrote:
| The close button is a convenient 10x10 square consisting of a
| light blue X on a light gray background. It moves when you
| zoom in on mobile to click it.
| ub99 wrote:
| The auto playing videos that are not related to the content of
| the article are, perhaps, the most baffling thing for me. I
| open an article and watch a video for a minute trying to
| understand the point - to only then realize that the video is
| unrelated. What's the point of this? In most cases I close the
| website and add it to my blocklist.
| shwoopdiwoop wrote:
| Missed the step where the search result takes you to the google
| hosted AMP version of the page and it takes forever to figure out
| how to escape that hell.
| culebron21 wrote:
| One part is missing: the IM window will make sound and show a
| respectable or attractive person in avatar.
| herodotus wrote:
| Brilliant! Thank you for doing this! I wish I could send the link
| to almost every organization whose web sites I have had to
| endure. If you had offered me a rating pop-up, you would have
| been the first one I ever use (and gave 5 stars to).
|
| Now do one for those horrible CRM messages "Thank you for XXXX.
| You are very important to us at YYY. Please click here to give us
| important feedback on your experience."
|
| After I bought a new VW from a local dealer, I was getting so
| many of these "requests" that I called the dealer and told them
| that I would never buy another car from them again if I got one
| more of these emails. They stopped.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _If you had offered me a rating pop-up, you would have been
| the first one I ever use (and gave 5 stars to)._
|
| I've recently started to. For example, just last week, my
| telco's app (that I use because it's the least-hassle way to
| pay my phone/Internet bills) got 2 stars on Google Play Store,
| with a comment explaining that the app is fine, except slowish,
| and constantly nags about rating it on the Play Store.
| heroprotagonist wrote:
| I usually get the "Bad? Rate on our own feedback page" "Good?
| Rate on the store" scam.
| vallas wrote:
| At the beginning you forgot the Google data disclaimer, and the
| Google results ad.
|
| Otherwise, I just go on Twitter, HN or Reddit to read an article
| and open it with a viewer like archive.is
| LegitGandalf wrote:
| Way to much written content implied, needs more twitter embeds
| mod50ack wrote:
| This is why I only browse, both on desktop and mobile, with a
| bunch of extensions to make the nonsense (mostly) stop.
| wisethrowaway wrote:
| It's been terrible in the last year.
|
| uBlock is not detecting Youtube ads,
|
| Twitter is blocking anonymous navigation
|
| And the examples of OP are all too accurate (Business Insider,
| Bloomberg, Forbes, Medium, virtually any platform).
| ratww wrote:
| I'm honestly liking it.
|
| When Youtube started showing ads for me I just stopped binge-
| watching videos on the site, and started using YouTube-dl and
| watching everything offline.
|
| I added those paywall sites to my hosts file block, I just
| don't care anymore. I already block everything from
| Facebook/Instagram, and I'm about to do the same with Twitter.
| My whole family and friend circle only really use
| WhatsApp/Telegram anyway, so it doesn't matter.
|
| Those things reduced my screen time a lot and I honestly find
| it healthy.
| wisethrowaway wrote:
| Some websites go past the point of no return (for me Twitter,
| Reddit, I don't bother anymore)
|
| But some websites were usable and now I am frustrated (in
| Bloomberg, newspapers the reader mode used to work but not
| anymore). Medium, Towardsdatascience have nice ML articles
| now often behind registration wall.
| mod50ack wrote:
| uBO and sponsorblock work for me. Have you updated your lists?
| On my phone I use NewPipe+SB. I use privacy redirect to go to
| nitter.
| rchaud wrote:
| I think he means the ad thumbnails, not the in-video ads
| themselves. Ublock hasn't been able to hide them for a while
| now.
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| reddit req
| jollybean wrote:
| Bravo thanks for this.
|
| It's a slippery slope tragedy of the commons that small actors
| can do nothing about really.
|
| If Google were to start rating on this basis, or some 3rd party
| were able to (and then get enough noise and traction) it might
| help.
|
| But it rather seems like there are a bunch of things that need to
| be done, not just one, including the controversial 'cookie issue'
| which I don't believe actually resolves the intended issue and
| creates a 'mini headache'.
| tus89 wrote:
| You would be amazed how much improved things are with Javascript
| switched off (which Chrome allows you to easily do, with
| exceptions). Give it a try.
| beprogrammed wrote:
| Agreed, I'm especially fond of uMatrix lately for firefox.
| tommica wrote:
| In a completely different direction - I've been getting a bit
| into cooking lately, and found a website called
| https://based.cooking and aside of the silly name, the content is
| great - just recipes and nothing else! Wish there was a search
| engine that was able to give sites like that as result, and not
| the current SEO junk that is being made, although they have good
| recipes hidden in their walls of text
| croes wrote:
| Web development and it's tools are often a top topic on HN.
| Better tools, new languages, new frameworks, improved frameworks
| etc. So now someone tell me why we get such sites? Why should I
| care about developers if they don't seem to care about me? And
| that's only the design and UX not to mention the whole tracking
| and spying.
| austincummings wrote:
| It's the business that doesn't care about you, not the
| developers.
| ratww wrote:
| Considering that lots of developer blogs these days also
| employ some of those tricks, I wouldn't be so sure.
| jstummbillig wrote:
| Did not even break the back button. What a joke joke.
| lazyfanatic wrote:
| I miss stumbleupon too my friend.
| beprogrammed wrote:
| Love it, that basically sums it up.
|
| I especially love that my browser asked if I really wanted to
| leave the page, got me with my own setup.
| lesinski wrote:
| This is what SEO has become. Free audience comes from Google as
| long as you make "free," targeted content. The authors are trying
| to extract every ounce of value they can from making that free
| content. I'm hesitant to suggest Google interfere even more with
| publishers' autonomy but they're the only ones who can
| incentivize them en masse to change how they collect information
| after the clickthrough.
| kinnth wrote:
| DuckDuckGo should add an ad / popup score to every article so
| that in the search results you could preview just how much crap
| you're expecting to see if you click. If there are no ads it
| could be a gold result or something :)
| peanut_worm wrote:
| You forgot the broken AMP page that only loads ads! Needs another
| step to click the top left, then click the page url, then wait
| for another page load.
| cutler wrote:
| In the early 2000s there was a site usability movement centred
| around the work of Jakob Nielsen and http://useit.com. Fortune
| 500s were paying him huge sums to have extraneous crap removed
| from their home pages and just for a while sanity and minimalism
| ruled. Then Web 2.0 arrived.
| rchaud wrote:
| Web 2.0 included cool stuff like Flash. The real culprit here
| is Google AdSense. A few sites made a ton of money, and then it
| became the entire business model for "new media" companies that
| in turn loaded up search results with SEO-optimized listicle
| garbage.
| mro_name wrote:
| another google honeypot. So ironic. haha.
| webmaven wrote:
| Advertising crams itself into every nook and cranny unless some
| external factor keeps it out. if you're old enough, you remember
| the inserts (usually advertising cigarettes) in pulp paperbacks:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/books/review/Collins-t.ht...
| sdevonoes wrote:
| IMHO, I think everyone here is missing the big point: all these
| "features" are being pushed to the web because A/B tests say so.
| The usual way things go is:
|
| - option 1: don't add feature X
|
| - option 2: add feature X
|
| - option 3: add feature X slightly modified
|
| So, since option 1 is not an option at all (businesses want to
| grow; they don't want "stable software", they want to push
| features live every sprint), then lean product managers say
| "let's do an A/B test and see what our customers like more:
| either option 1 or option 2!". The A/B test is done and it
| appears that option 2 increases conversion slightly more than
| option 1. The team pushes the feature live and everyone call it a
| day.
|
| The next sprint: the same story. So, the net result is that
| applications and websites get "features" on of top of each other
| without any order or purpose, but everyone is happy because
| metrics look good. I know it's very counterintuitive, but that's
| how things work these days: no one wants to hear your "common
| sense" opinion, they only want to listen to what the data says;
| and data says the more ads the more revenue, the more newsletter
| pop ups the more user emails store in the db, etc.
|
| I know this because I have worked for such companies, and they
| are not precisely going bankrupt.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| So you're basically telling us they do it to make money, and
| they're not wrong, it works to make money? I don't think that
| actually comes as a shock to anyone!
|
| My favorite scene in the movie Sorry To Bother You:
|
| - See? It's all just a big misunderstanding.
|
| - This ain't no fucking misunderstanding, man! So, you making
| half-human, half-horse fucking things so you can make more
| money?
|
| - Yeah, basically. I just didn't want you to think I was crazy.
| That I was doing this for no reason. Because this isn't
| irrational.
|
| - Oh. Cool. Alright. Cool. No, I understand. I just I just got
| to leave now, man. So, please get the fuck out of my way.
| aspectmin wrote:
| This... I absolutely Abhor what the web has become. Somehow, we
| need a new web (maybe out of the blockchain related
| work/distributed internet endeavors?) The current state is sooo
| bad.
| pjerem wrote:
| Check Gemini network. Far from being the network that will
| replace the web (and that's not even a goal), it's really...
| interesting.
| mod wrote:
| Can you provide a link? A quick google just returned a bunch
| of links to what looked like an alt-coin. There's an app
| called "Gemini Network", but the screenshot looked like a
| crypto marketplace.
| pjerem wrote:
| Of course :) There it is :
| https://gemini.circumlunar.space/
| leandot wrote:
| Awesome, but not complete. It's missing the GDPR popup and the
| "better experience in app" one.
| zwieback wrote:
| In real life every other website for the next week would have ads
| for "how-I-experience-web-today.com", Instagram and Facebook
| would have ads for other "experiences" as well
| tick_tock_tick wrote:
| Honestly the site is way too performant to be realistic. All
| those buttons worked nearly instantly. I'm assuming you're
| missing the awaited tracking networking calls.
| naravara wrote:
| I was about to say it needs about 7 or 8 additional ads
| inserted into the text of the article. Ideally they would load
| at random times and displace text out of the way as you're
| trying to read so you keep losing your place.
|
| Also, the article itself is clickbaity garbage that you resent
| yourself for clicking into in the first place.
| ksec wrote:
| And my Laptop fan wasn't spinning up with all those Ads. And
| web page scrolling started to jank.
| llimos wrote:
| Especially the 'More options' on the cookie popup. Needs to
| take at least 20 seconds and reload the page
| pphysch wrote:
| Needs more `await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, t));`
| adverbly wrote:
| LGTM
|
| *Merges "changes to apiPromiseFactory.js"
| croes wrote:
| And ads should load later so if you try to click a link the
| whole page content jumps down when you click and you click the
| ad instead of the link.
| fossuser wrote:
| Maybe you can make it so the ad always loads under the
| cursor?
| mathnmusic wrote:
| After all the popups, it needs a last one saying "this site
| works best in our mobile app".
| notquitehuman wrote:
| IMHO, it should be there as soon as you arrive on the site
| and then reappear on every page load.
| function_seven wrote:
| And if you click past it to remain on the web version,
| you're presented with truncated lists ("Download App to
| read the rest!") or a slew of missing features.
|
| I have an old Instagram account that I created over 10
| years ago. At the time, I used it for the photo filters.
| Never cared about the social networking aspect. Just a
| month ago I logged into it for the first time in forever,
| and realized I wanted to delete those old posts. Guess what
| you _can 't_ do from the website? Yeah, delete posts. Need
| the app for that!
| ratww wrote:
| Not surprising. Facebook has very strict rate-limiting
| for deletion of posts, unfollowing of friends, leaving
| communities, and anything else that can potentially
| reduce your "engagement". Disabling it on some platforms
| was just the next step.
| G3rn0ti wrote:
| I really hate that about Reddit. I liked browsing discussions
| on my phone occasionally but the web page kept nagging me
| into using the app instead. So finally I installed it. But
| now when googling for information and finding Reddit boards
| about my topic of interest clicking on ,,use app" does not
| open Reddit app but instead directs me to the stupid App
| store. Useless! But maybe it's Apple's fault here?
| phist_mcgee wrote:
| Nope. Deep linking to apps is a solved area. Reddit
| completely drops the ball on this, and has for years. Their
| engineering is a complete shambles. The only reason they
| survive is their market share, not for any reason of 'good
| experience'
| ptudan wrote:
| haha clone of my comment at the same time
| phist_mcgee wrote:
| Great minds think alike ;)
| ptudan wrote:
| Nope. Decent programmers know how to deeplink into apps,
| it's completely possible.
| rchaud wrote:
| That includes the vendor of my third-party Reddit app
| (Now for Reddit).
|
| If I tap a Reddit link from a page of search results, the
| link opens in the app.
|
| It's shocking that the devs of the official app don't
| even bother to do even this bare minimum.
| dc3k wrote:
| I am not seeing any autoplaying videos unrelated to the article
| that pop into a PIP window in the bottom of the screen as you
| scroll causing the amount that you've scrolled to jump so you
| lose your place
| rchaud wrote:
| We will be paying the price for Facebook's 2017-era "Pivot to
| video" advice for years to come.
| coldpie wrote:
| I have no idea how anyone browses the web without NoScript.
| SevenSigs wrote:
| You need to make the close buttons a lot harder to find... this
| looks like science fiction.
| chestervonwinch wrote:
| Needs to prefix the tab's title with a blinking "(1)" or "*" when
| the chat pops up. And have that paired with a loud chat
| notification sound. Edit: also should mention that this is both
| sad and awesome.
| junon wrote:
| Little details - making it to the article and the click out gives
| you the browser "Are you sure you want to leave?" prompt.
|
| Scary accurate. I hate the web.
| leavenotracks wrote:
| So true, so sad.
|
| These days, when even a few hurdles of crap present themselves, I
| often just leave. I don't care what the site has to say or sell
| me.
|
| Whenever I come across a site that just displays content
| immediately, it fills me with joy. Usually it's some obscure
| personal or academic site, but for a moment I feel like I've
| found a gem in the desert and I browse happily for a while...then
| I promptly add to a list of non-crap-peddling sites. I long for a
| curated list of such sites.
| rchaud wrote:
| I keep a list of personal/small websites as well. Sites that
| don't have this endless amount of marketing and tracking cruft.
|
| Unfortunately it makes for pretty boring reading. So many sites
| out there have like 4 or 5 blog posts, and that's it.
| tpoacher wrote:
| This is why I love the gemini space. It feels ... unadulterated
| somehow.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Gemini is awesome, but it's lack of ambition is what really
| kills it for me. I appreciate their minimalist take on the
| web, but if their implementation is _less robust_ than what
| we currently have, I have very little incentive to host a
| site there.
| themodelplumber wrote:
| > I long for a curated list of such sites.
|
| I don't know if this is good news but I started doing this a
| while back and found so many sites that it was futile to keep
| them in one list. These days I tend to keep them in contextual
| notes or databases.
|
| Also many of them fail to pass one or two annoyance tests, but
| I find that they're worth it anyway. For example they are not
| mobile friendly in some minor way, like the touch target for
| their menu is annoyingly small, or they are a little bit
| cluttered, or use more CPU than I'd like (specific mapping
| sites).
|
| So it's not easy to fit a perfect list, but it's impressive to
| me just how deep the less-discovered, high quality web really
| is.
|
| (Also I try to make my own obscure personal sites all the time
| as my contribution to this mess...)
| leavenotracks wrote:
| > ...but it's impressive to me just how deep the less-
| discovered, high quality web really is.
|
| Would that there were a search engine out there that
| prioritised the indexing of these high quality 'well behaved'
| sites.
| simonmales wrote:
| That would be a joy to have.
| fouc wrote:
| Interesting it occurs to me that google search could do
| this, but they have a conflict of interest - adsense.
| abhinavsharma wrote:
| Million short sort of does this
| danuker wrote:
| Here's mine: https://danuker.go.ro/
|
| Tip: add your site to your HN profile, and look at others'
| profile.
| leavenotracks wrote:
| Thank you - great tip, and great site! I like that you also
| mix in articles in, what I presume, is your native Romanian.
| SilasX wrote:
| It has a fixed floating header though.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-23 23:00 UTC)