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

  • TriflingToad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 days ago

    yo honk honk am here to help. Right click the back button to bring up a menu of several previous pages select when it was the search engine or whatever you used before. For Firefox. If you’re on chrome, you can cry. Honk honk, goose out.

  • RedStrider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    I was just thinking about this.

    Super annoying because it can actually be fixed by using History.replaceState() over History.pushState().

    I guess the reason they do it is either to keep you stuck on their sucky site, or just incompetence.

        • warbond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          Big Hanlon fan, but I don’t think stupidity is enough to explain why the site behaves that way.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            9 days ago

            I’m not a fan of Hanlon’s Razor, because I feel like people believe it to be some kind of steadfast law of the universe when in reality it’s just a “rule of thumb.” And honestly not even a great one imo.

            I feel like there are a whole lot of bad people that use the concept as cover to help them get away with the heinous shit they do. People who do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 days ago

          idk, it seems like with this being a company that generates revenue from “clicks” doing something that essentially makes a person refresh the page 20 times seems like a good decision to make

        • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I feel like when you’re talking corporations, hanlons razor needs to be reversed. Never attribute to stupidity what could be adequately explained by malice. We’ll call it Nolnahs razor.

  • ober9000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 days ago

    Aren’t they scamming their advertisers too? Because if you click the back button a bunch of times it’s gonna reload a bunch of them on every click. At least if your internet is fast enough.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Impressions are usually deduped, meaning multiple impressions from the same user during the same session are just counted as one. The big ad networks are extremely careful to avoid miscounting of any sort and will generally err on the side of undercounting rather than overcounting (since telling advertisers they got more impressions or clicks than reported is way better than telling them the numbers were accidentally inflated). Of course, there’s the occasional bug, but it mostly works as expected.

      • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        I just realized you meant data deduplication instead of “not duped by you bitches anymore”

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          Usually the ad needs to be in your viewport for at least a few seconds to count as an impression. If you were just going back quickly, or quickly refreshing the page, it won’t count. If you go back or refresh, see a different ad, wait a bit, then refresh again, I think it’d count.

          For skippable ads on YouTube, the advertiser only pays if you watch past the point where you can skip it. If I remember correctly, you have to watch at least 30 seconds of the video (or the full video if it’s less than 30 seconds) for it to count as a view.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    9 days ago

    Well enjoying a game of footie is your first mistake. Oh wait, I got confused, too many euros around, sorry about that. Footie is what I call soccer, aka foreign football.

    Enjoying a game of football is your first mistake.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    9 days ago

    Also: Algorithmic generated feeds where you try to click on one thing, but you click on the next thing in the list and when you click back, the feed looks completely different because it has new information on you. That thing you wanted to click on is gone and will never return.

      • Skyhighatrist@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 days ago

        What’s worse is that YouTube sometimes doesn’t do that, i.e. when you hit back it shows the same list from the cache or something. It gives you hope and makes it worse on those occasions when it does fully refresh on back.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 days ago

      Youtube recommended videos does this. Not a huge issue because I can always search for the video myself but it’s annoying.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Ugh yes.

        Though on desktop I’ve completely switched over to using FreeTube, and I’ve been loving it. The order of the videos in the feed does not change. It’s great.

      • ...m...@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        …and now you’ve hit upon my other peeve: (mostly shopping) sites coded to disable browsing links in a new tab…

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Perhaps it’s because I never raw dog the web, and using uBlock Origin on “medium mode” somehow fixes it, but I don’t think I have ever experienced that.

          I have experienced sites that block right clicking, and that has always infuriated me. But I was able to get a little FF extension that disables right click blocking on websites. Which is pretty useful for downloading videos on sites that try to stop you from downloading their videos (though some have wisened up and can completely disable the ability to save a video through that method. The “save video as” option is completely greyed out). yt-dlp usually works in those cases, or one of the countless web-based video downloaders… but still annoying.

          • ...m...@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 days ago

            …ah, i may be conflating contextal menus with opening new tabs, since that’s the primary UI mode i use to do so: regardless, any kind of shenanigans which aim to disable application-level UI get under my skin…

    • IndiBrony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      That’s actually how I do my Lemmy feed. I have one chance to comment on a thread and if I don’t do it, when the page refreshes I lose it forever.

      I’ve learned to accept that there are just some things the universe never wanted me to comment on.

      • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I’d love that, my entire frontpage is the same 30 things over and over unless I deliberately sort for something then it’s a DIFFERENT 30 things over and over

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          Try some different sorting options. I’ve found “Active” and “Hot” to be kind of shitty (though to be fair, I haven’t really used them in like 6 months so maybe they’re better).

          I usually go for “Top 6 Hours” or “Top 12 Hours” for stuff that’s not too old and relatively active.

  • terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days 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.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      As the screenshot illustrates, the redirects have been repeated many times to thwart that strategy.

      • terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days 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

  • bitwolf@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 days 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
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days 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@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days 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.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days 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.

  • njordomir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    This is why I have dozens, if not hundreds of tabs open. Usually I open links in a new tab so I can easily tab back to where I came from. Using a hierarchical tab manager makes this work better because when you’re done with the topic, you close the whole branch… theoretically.

    This tactic also seems targeted at mobile users where it’s harder to break the loop.

  • Katana314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    What makes me angry here is, I am 90% sure the browsers could code against this.

    If the user clicks a control on a webpage one time, the stack can declare “One user click! You have earned yourself One (1) navigation.” Then, the click activates some JavaScript that moves you to a new webpage. That new webpage has an auto-loader redirect that instead runs a 300ms timeout, and then takes you to some other page. The browser, meanwhile, has seen this, and establishes “We are still only operating off of that One (1) click. So, instead of adding a new page to the user history, we’ll replace that first navigation.”

    I have yet to hear a satisfactory reason as to why that’s not possible.

    • Robert7301201@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 days ago

      We just got vertical align last month. There’s so many things they should be working on but are too busy trying to add more ads or monetization features.

      I think the web is just too long in the tooth at this point but there’s nothing we can do.

      • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 days ago

        CSS features like vertical alignment would be defined by web standards. Those fall under the non-profit org W3C. They’re pretty slow about things as to not break the fuck out of everything.

        Browser behaviour like merging redirects falls on browsers tho, so yeah, we can blame Chrome or FF on that one.

        • Overshoot2648@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Still waiting for CSS Color 4 so SVG gradients don’t look like shit. sRGB gradients are completely broken.

  • Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 days 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
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 days 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
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days 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.

          • Eiri@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

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

            • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 days 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.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days 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.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days 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.