Click a link and need to go back 10x to get back. Yes, I enjoy the footballs.

  • @Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    217 months ago

    I’ve always wondered. Is there really a benefit to a ton of redirects like that? Like, do they gain anything by making it harder to back out?

    Or is it just extremely incompetent website programming?

    • @prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      107 months ago

      I always just assumed it was a form of “dark pattern” meant to try to stop people from leaving their website once they’ve entered (e.g., coming from a different site, you can’t just hit backspace or click back to immediately exit their site. You’re stuck now).

      • @Eiri@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        I think that’s right for a website where you accidentally clicked an ad and now it’s trying to convince you you have a virus and you need to download their virus to remove it. Or maybe for an ad pop-up where annoying you might increase the chances that the content makes it into your brain.

        But for a news website i have trouble seeing the logic.

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          News websites get revenue via ads. This makes people load the same page again, loading the ads again.

          • @Eiri@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            27 months ago

            I’d have expected ad providers to catch on pretty quickly that there’s cheating involved, no?

            • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              Nope. They just hear back about number of views and how it influences the shoppers and brags about how it works.

              I honestly think it’s mostly the idea of advertising that keeps it running as an industry.

              Like Facebook juicing their video viewership and recent news about Google using off screen ads in their views and impressions numbers.

            • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              They also get paid off of this, the advertiser pays for those impressions.

              Advertisers can’t switch because they can’t not be present on big platforms. The whole ad industry is just companies scamming each other and the consumer.

        • @prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Any page that makes their revenue through ads do everything they can to maximize engagement, and that means keeping them on your website as long as possible. So any little thing they can do to that end, they will.

  • The Pantser
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1087 months ago

    This could easily be fixed by the browsers but they don’t. Sure wish these back button tricks would stop. Especially news sites try to keep you from getting back to your search and makes your page refresh over and over. I wonder if that behavior counts as hits to their advertisers.

    • @ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      357 months ago

      I don’t know about “easily.” replaceState() is actually intended to make single-page apps easier to use, by allowing you to use your back button as expected even when you’re staying on the same URL the entire time.

      Likewise, single-page apps are intended to be faster and more efficient than downloading a new static page that’s 99.9% identical to the old one every time you change something.

      Fixing this bad experience would eliminate the legitimate uses of replaceState().

      Now, what they could do is track your browser history “canonically” and fork it off whenever Javascript alters its state, and then allow you to use a keyboard shortcut (Alt + Back, perhaps?) to go to the “canonical” previous item in history instead of to the “forked” previous item.

      • deejay4am
        link
        fedilink
        English
        67 months ago

        Pop a window open with a your app in it (with the user’s permission) without a back button if you want that.

        A web page should be a document, not an experience.

        • @ilinamorato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          57 months ago

          That would absolutely make everything worse, no question; the web should be more integrated, not less. We shouldn’t incentivize even more companies to silo off their content into apps.

          • ggppjj
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            I think the word ‘app’ was being used in place of ‘webapp’ there, which is the general target audience for this feature.

            • @ilinamorato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              Yes, I think you’re correct, but using browsers to coerce the web back into static documents will result in companies creating their own apps so that they can continue to deliver experiences. And the past 10+ years has shown that users will absolutely follow them.

              • ggppjj
                link
                fedilink
                English
                17 months ago

                Sorry, this comment was mainly just providing the previous user with a correction because they seemed to think that the other person that they were replying to was talking about forcing people to use phone apps, which I assume we all agree is bad and would likely work if there were a concentrated push for it.

                Concerning your points after “using the browser”: I want websites to use replaceState and manage their own intra-page navigation with a cookie. They can still intercept the back button as they do now, but they should only get the single history entry until they switch to a new page, if they ever do.

      • @SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        97 months ago

        I can handle life without the legitimate use case if it means no more clickjacking bs from companies that should know better

        • @ilinamorato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          157 months ago

          I’d prefer not to let the bad actors dictate browser design.

          “Let’s get rid of images since companies can use images to spoof browserchrome elements.”

          “Let’s get rid of text since scammers can pretend to be sending messages from the computer’s operating system.”

          “Let’s get rid of email since phishing exists.”

          Nah. We can do some stuff (like the aforementioned forked history) to ameliorate the problem, and if it’s well-known enough, companies won’t find it necessary anymore. Heck, browsers like Firefox would probably even let you select Canonical Back as the default Back Button behavior, and then you can have the web the way you want it (like people who disable Javascript).

          • ggppjj
            link
            fedilink
            English
            47 months ago

            I’m frustrated that removing bad functionality is being treated as a slippery slope with obviously bad and impossible jokes as the examples chosen.

            I see a bad feature being abused, and I don’t see the removal of that bad feature as a dangerous path to getting rid of email. I don’t ascribe the same weight that you seem to towards precedent in this matter.

            • @ilinamorato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              I’ve been working in full stack for long enough to know that history manipulation is as much a part of the modern web as images and email. I’m not trying to be flippant, that’s just the state of the modern web. Single-page apps are here, and that’s a good thing. They’re being used badly, and that’s endemic to all features. So no, history manipulation is not “bad functionality,” though I admit it’s not fully baked in its current implementation.

              • ggppjj
                link
                fedilink
                English
                17 months ago

                I accept that it’s how things are, I just personally feel as though the only way this feature could ever work as it does now is with the implementation it has now, and that the convenience of single page webapps that use history manipulation is not worth the insane annoyance of helping my grandma get out of websites that tell her that she has been hacked by the FBI.

          • @gwen@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            77 months ago

            like people who disable Javascript).

            i do that, and i found that a TON of microsoft & bank/work websites just refuse to do anything without it. i love the modern internet /s

  • @terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17 months ago

    Not sure about that site specifically, but others that’s done it to me was easy to get around. Most of them are thwarted with basically double clicking the back button.

      • @terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        I get that, forgot to mention that clicking the back button very very fast is what usually works for me.

        Regardless, it’s annoying af

  • KillingTimeItself
    link
    fedilink
    English
    157 months ago

    just click again, but fast enough to get the redirect, but not too fast to miss it and double click, and try not to do it a third time or you’re going back a few ages.

    • @Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17 months ago

      Only the first time you visit in a while though.

      I think it’s taking you away to a login page, logging you in, then bringing you back.

      I can see the point if you were going to ask or answer a question, but 99% of the time you just want to see how somebody else didn’t get their problem solved by some random Indian guy who people assume works for Microsoft, who think the solution to everything is running “sfc /scannow” which has replaced chkdsk as the command most likely to take a long time, do nothing, and make the question asker go away without a solution to their problem.

  • @reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17 months ago

    Press and hold the back button. A lot of times this will show a history where you can select a page further back.

  • bitwolf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    57 months ago

    You can right click (long press on mobile) to skip back to the page that took you there

    • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17 months ago

      That’s what OP has done; that’s what we’re seeing in this screenshot.

      The back button is highlighted. This list is the list of options OP gets when he right clicks the back button.

      • bitwolf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        I don’t see evidence of them skipping back two pages past the point in history that redirects which is what prompted my comment.

  • Dizzy Devil Ducky
    link
    fedilink
    English
    237 months ago

    This is one of the absolute greatest reasons to support opening most everything in a new tab (as long as you don’t end up like my mom who at one point had over 100 tabs on her phone). Doesn’t matter if it’s a link from the same website, from a search engine, or whatever else there is. New tab.

    • ✺roguetrick✺
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Then on android Firefox you accidentally hit the back button and it closes the tab and you can’t go forward and you already navigatedc away from the originating page on the other tab forcing you to open your history and try to figure out where the hell it is.

      • @ChanchoManco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Ctrl Shift T doesn’t work on that case?

        Edit: I skipped the Android bit, sorry.

        Edit 2: From the 3 dots menu INSIDE the tabs view you can access a list of recently closed tabs, not nearly as fast as a 3 key combo, but maybe better than looking for the tab in the history. Also apparently there’s an extension that may help.

    • @Akasazh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      What helps with this is clicking links with mousewheeldown, I automatically opens in a new tab. Also MWD on the tab label will close it, so you don’t have to aim for the ‘x’.

      A mouse with thumb buttons is really handy as they do foreward and back, double clicking that gets you out of the issue caused in op

      • HEXN3T
        link
        fedilink
        English
        57 months ago

        Either use tree tabs, or just close it when you’re done.

          • HEXN3T
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            No, my browser (Mullvad) clears everything upon quit. I quit every time I get on a new “subject”.