Dark Patterns are designed to trick you (and they’re all over the Web)

No, it's not only you—some user interfaces today intentionally want to confuse and enroll.

Read the whole story

 

[RickRoyLeonPrisZhoraRachael]

Perhaps the most discourteous, proliferous and notorious are the "Adobe" and "Oracle" updates with the boxes "conveniently" checked so that you get that McAfeeSecurity Install, or that your home page and search engine are now Yahoo or AskNow Toolbar...

I blame the lobbyists and congress for allowing the "opt out" rather than "opt in" put on the web.

 

[pokrface]

Ugh, that stamps.com picture. I got bitten by them late last year and lost two months of $15.99 payments to them, and yes, I had to call to cancel. Fortunately, the phone cancellation process was pretty painless and the agent waived the current month's charge—took about two minutes and then it was over.

Still, I consider myself a pretty savvy consumer who pays attention to fine print and who doesn't usually get snared in "dark patterns"—but I sure got snared by this one.

 

[randy123]

Happend to me once. Form a prestigious and respected company with a lot of power and influence in the area I work in. It took nearly a week of harassing phone calls to get my money back. I think most people in my field would be too intimidated to cross these people. And is was left in no doubt that what I was doing was just that.

 

[Boskone]

I didn't realize there was any sort of recognized name for this behavior, but I noticed the behavior itself.

When shopping for cell plans, for instance, I built a spreadsheet and did some math to at least estimate $/min and $/GB. The result was, ultimately, pretty minimal differences at the time just as the article says.

Pretty much every agreement or legal document I've seen in at least the last decade is an exercise in "dark pattern" design, with conceptually simple facts buried in walls of obfuscating language often placed in logically odd locations.

 

[Zak]

Example of deliberately confusing or deceptive user interfaces: Windows 10 installer.

 

[ten91]

My ISP did this to get me to opt into their paperless billing. I was in a rush to pay a bill online before going on vacation and didn't uncheck the stupid box at the bottom of the page.

 

[DannyB]

Would you like to enroll in our craptacular offer which is free for 90 days and then costs $9.95 per month thereafter?
Please check one of the following options:
(_) No. Please DO NOT add me to the list of people to be excluded from being automatically enrolled in our special craptacular offer.
(_) Yes. Please DO add me to the list of people ineligible to not be excluded from not being enrolled in our special craptacular offer.
If you do not select one of the options, then default will automatically be selected for you.
Thank you for enrolling in our craptacular special offer!

 

[brackish_ish]

The inability to cancel services online should be an automatic red flag that you're dealing with shady business practices. You can sign up in 15 seconds on an app, but can't cancel with the app or a webpage? Please.

 

[issor]

The British airways screenshot seems like a bad example, a stretch. It looks to be sorted by departure time and flight length, and includes highlighted "lowest" tags to help you easily identify the best price in each column. Can someone point out to me where the page says it was sorted by price?

 

[ten91]

Zak[/url]":2r5wbzuw]Example of deliberately confusing or deceptive user interfaces: Windows 10 installer.

I think that's equal parts dark pattern and just annoying you till you agree.

 

[issor]

I got a call from 1 and 1 just the other day. I used them as a registrar, but am transferring away slowly. I got a pretty audacious sales pitch where they repeatedly tried to turn on various SEO and webpage tools for the non-existent website I don't host with them. The caller tried to make it sound like it would be a favor, but it was a forced continuity pitch where I'd have to call in and cancel if I didn't want to be billed. It's the first time I've had a company I already do business with try to swindle me in that manner, and it's easy because they don't even need to collect billing info, they just need an "OK".

I could totally see a click through page during login that does something like "inform" you of a "free" trial being added to your account.

 

[haar]

A really great read!.

 

[infected]

By far the most deceptive thing I frequently come across recenly, is the delayed loading of elements and buttons on web pages and installing apps.

 

[bigslim]

Price Zuckering, refers to confusing interfaces tricking users into sharing more information than they want to.

This should be "Privacy Zuckering" right?

 

[ten91]

Oh. When a site loads something that displaces a button so you end up clicking the new object rather than the button you were going for.

 

[szbalint]

I signed up to Wired a few months back as I prefer to support publications directly and not by looking at ads. Unfortunately I've found that even though I was logged in, Wired still kept throwing up those annoying nag screens about adblockers twice a day (I also found that their content is pretty shallow - only one or two substantial pieces once in a while).

When trying to cancel my subscription, I found they had a Douglas Adams equivalent ("It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.' ") account management page, where when clicking on the subscription status I've received the following message: 'You are not eligible to change your auto renewal status'.

Something like this is completely unacceptable in 2016. I've emailed their customer support and let them know that I'd like to cancel my subscription and that I'm extremely unhappy about the roadblocks they implemented to prevent people cancelling their subscriptions and and added a note that I'll escalate this to my bank if needed to get the subscription cancelled.

That fnally worked. I will gladly support a quality site - of course quality is not just about the content but the whole experience.

 

[infected]

ten91[/url]":3s10kd08]Oh. When a site loads something that displaces a button so you end up clicking the new object rather than the button you were going for.

The thing I find really sad with stuff like that is, it is actually really clever, if only people like that could put there mind to something less shitty.

 

[issor]

ten91[/url]":35mw7rjy]Oh. When a site loads something that displaces a button so you end up clicking the new object rather than the button you were going for.

That happens to me on mobile Arstechnica ALL THE TIME. You'd think sites could make their marketing blocks statically sized, but they take ~10 seconds to load and constantly shift elements on the page as they do.

A similar pattern I've noticed, that seems accidental but might just be clever, are mobile sites that have ads interleaved, and you inadvertently click the ad as you scroll. Sometimes it is barely avoidable.

 

[...m...]

...the large print giveth and the small print taketh away; step right up, step right up, step right up...

 

[randy123]

vamitra[/url]":10b7izwa]Lets be honest these same practices have been used to do "good". Changing the default behavior for higher monthly payments of credit cards, more contribution to 401k, default sign up health insurance.
Good UI is as much about allowing people the choice, as much as to guide them to make a choice that you intend. The outcome of doing 'good' or 'bad' is what is finally at odds.

I was once at a talk on using gameification to encourage users to spend more time on your website. When the speaker revealed that he worked for a gambling wevsite there was a shocked silence in the room. He then gave a verry plausable 10 minute speach on how what he was doing was actually good for society. He convinced no one.

 

[Adam Starkey]

issor[/url]":q3xfllaq]The British airways screenshot seems like a bad example, a stretch. It looks to be sorted by departure time and flight length, and includes highlighted "lowest" tags to help you easily identify the best price in each column. Can someone point out to me where the page says it was sorted by price?

I'm going to go one further: anyone who has spent any serious time on the BA site, especially someone with a rewards account, has discovered that there is not one, but three different booking systems currently in use. One of which looks like the zombie remains of their 2000 era site. They're all broken on some level.

As far as I can tell, anything that looks user hostile on the BA site is very much as likely to be the result of incompetence or disorganization.

(that said, they're very deceptive about rewards flight costs, but that's a whole other deal)

 

[Meathim]

The closest thing for me is the few times I have forgotten to cancel the classic one month free subscriptions and it has been automatically renewed. The offers were very very clear this was going to happen if you forgot to cancel though and the process of cancellation was just a button click, so I do blame myself.

It is the bane of existance though. So many peoples computers/accounts are filled up with stuff like this.

EDIT: Is the "feature creep/price" ratio a part of this? You know, a service, program, app or whatever starts out as one thing and a year later you have to pay to use to use the feautre you wanted and more and more features is being moved to the paying tier? That is a snakepit.

 

[ten91]

infected[/url]":fararjb3]

ten91[/url]":fararjb3]Oh. When a site loads something that displaces a button so you end up clicking the new object rather than the button you were going for.

The thing I find really sad with stuff like that is, it is actually really clever, if only people like that could put there mind to something less shitty.

It happened to me on Imgur's mobile site. I'd go to tap the screen and the "Use or mobile app" ad would pop up and instead of moving on it'd end up launching the store to the apps page.

 

[infected]

randy123[/url]":29afsa6i]

vamitra[/url]":29afsa6i]Lets be honest these same practices have been used to do "good". Changing the default behavior for higher monthly payments of credit cards, more contribution to 401k, default sign up health insurance.
Good UI is as much about allowing people the choice, as much as to guide them to make a choice that you intend. The outcome of doing 'good' or 'bad' is what is finally at odds.

I was once at a web designed conference where a person was giving a talk on using gameification to encourage users to spend more time on your website. When he revealed half way through his talk that he worked for a gambling wevsite there was a shocked silence in the room. He then gave a verry plausable 10 minute speach on how what he was doing was actually good for society.

That is technically true, "Society" is the name of his Hummer.

 

[Justin Credible]

Any site that wants your credit card # before you sign up for a free month should be a red flag for all of us, because somewhere in that 27 page ToS there is that blurred line that says "we are eventually going to screw you."

Looking at you Slooth(dot)com.

 

[NickAVV]

RickRoyLeonPrisZhoraRachael[/url]":13a3khoi]Perhaps the most discourteous, proliferous and notorious are the "Adobe" and "Oracle" updates with the boxes "conveniently" checked so that you get that McAfeeSecurity Install, or that your home page and search engine are now Yahoo or AskNow Toolbar...

I blame the lobbyists and congress for allowing the "opt out" rather than "opt in" put on the web.

Every single damn Java update

 

[pokrface]

I got a call from 1 and 1 just the other day. I used them as a registrar, but am transferring away slowly.

Obligatory shout-out to gandi.net—been using them for years and IME their "no bullshit" motto is 100% accurate.

 

[jdietz]

Someone needs to make a browser extension that pops up a banner on sites like this. I don't wanna be vigilant. I want to be told "these guys are jerks, don't do business with them."

Ars technica is too far on the other side, however. Could you put a "subscribe" item somewhere in the menus at the top if I'm not a subscriber? The Ars subscription is clear that it's recurring billing. If you don't want to be automatically billed again, you can cancel the recurring billing, keeping the rest of your current subscription.

I have been reading the site for many years and I like the content; I decided to purchase a subscription today.

 

[DarkSkyForever]

I'd like to submit one of the worst examples I've seen - G2A "Shield". G2A is a key reseller that promises "protection" if the key you buy is not legitimate (which is useless as you can just get a refund anyway) they'll just send you a new one for a small fee - what they don't tell you is that this fee is a monthly subscription.

If you notice the recurring charge and try to cancel it, you're subjected to shit ass-hattery.

http://imgur.com/a/PUwPC

 

[photovirus]

Once there was a shady practice to change home page address: a user installs some famous app with some pre-checked options, clicks next-next-next-finish, and voila, he's got a new homepage he didn't ask for. Nobody liked that for sure.
But then an “improvement” appeared. Famous apps began to install a background program which tracked if someone modified that unwanted homepage and undid any changes immediately.

Maybe the practice still lives but I don't know for sure.

 

[jdietz]

photovirus[/url]":23xlp48v]Once there was a shady practice to change home page address: a user installs some famous app with some pre-checked options, clicks next-next-next-finish, and voila, he's got a new homepage he didn't ask for. Nobody liked that for sure.
But then an “improvement” appeared. Famous apps began to install a background program which tracked if someone modified that unwanted homepage and undid any changes immediately.

Programs that change your homepage are OK.
Background services that keep your homepage pointed to a certain site are classified as adware (in other words, malicious) by various software packages. Your anti-virus program might not let you install such software or give a malicious software warning.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

jdietz[/url]":21y48uag]Someone needs to make a browser extension that pops up a banner on sites like this. I don't wanna be vigilant. I want to be told "these guys are jerks, don't do business with them."

Ars technica is too far on the other side, however. Could you put a "subscribe" item somewhere in the menus at the top if I'm not a subscriber? The Ars subscription is clear that it's recurring billing. If you don't want to be automatically billed again, you can cancel the recurring billing, keeping the rest of your current subscription.

There are plugins that show a reputation rating for sites.

 

[daemonios]

My pet peeve: ads that commandeer a browser tab, open a new browser tab, redirect directly to an app store or open a dialogue box. I'm scared to death of those dialogue boxes, as I never know if any of the buttons are malicious and they can't be simply dismissed. When that happens I usually force close the whole browser and start a new session. BTW is this too tinfoil-hatty, or a reasonable precaution?

 

[icrf]

What are credit card terms for paying for things like this? If you see your monthly stamps.com charge that you signed up for online and didn't knowingly opt-into, see it requires a business hours phone call to cancel, can you just dispute the charge at your credit card bank and let them fight it out? That would mostly leave you one place to look for charges, and one entity to talk to about it. Sure, be vigilant, but when something slips though, is that always a valid option?

I know my bank lets me dispute individual charges online. Don't have to talk to anyone. I'm not sure how it applies to these dodgy services that I may have technically signed up for. One thing I know for sure is that having someone like stamps.com deal with a credit card bank is way more painful for them than dealing with me. Easier on me and harder on them is a win-win.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

The key to reining in Candy Crush was not the backend of Facebook, however—it was that consumer pressure.

Someone should try that with spam.

 

[vlam]

This shit is so common that when I don't see an unwanted check box when creating accounts/installing programs, I frantically search for what I've missed. This was especially true one time I updated flash. No pressure to install Ask or McAfee, so I kept clicking through and retrying, wondering why I couldn't find the gotcha junkware.

Sadly, about 5-6 times a year I have to uninstall junk from my mom's pc because she didn't uncheck a box.

 

[Penforhire]

It doesn't help that our credit card companies have all enacted "voice mail hell" where is takes some minutes to get to an actual person who can help you. Our banks are similar. I can get to a person slightly faster but THAT person cannot help me with any unusual issue.

 

[Moedius]

...the large print giveth and the small print taketh away; step right up, step right up, step right up...

+1 for the Step Right Up Lyrics.

Tom Waits for President.