The faux-rationalist appeal to “revealed preference” is very anti-consent behaviour. Like the shit a rapist would say.

Stop using this nonsense term. You can dark-pattern people into clicking whatever you want and then gaslight them but it doesn’t mean you have any useful data.

writer, content creator, decentralization enthusiast • links: thumbsup.me • find me in: /thumbsup 



Like Mark Zuckerberg thinks our revealed preference is we want to be tracked all over the web by hidden tracking pixels. We haven’t opted for not using the Internet right? So I guess we love it. 

Mark is the pinnacle of anti-consent behaviour, and those who look up to him worry me.

The actual thing you’re noting is not a “revealed preference” but a “displayed behaviour in a specific context.”

If you’re not AB testing with controls over a broad set, you’re not revealing anything about behaviour. You’re just sating your own confirmation bias.

A doodler and computerer. I like permissive/permissionless open source, smart contracts, p2p systems, room-scale VR, and NixOS.

Currently: WhatsABI

That’s a great example because Photoshop is very unintuitive and it’s helped Figma be so successful by not innovating around. And yet, people keep buying it right. So Adobe will say “that’s proof we’re doing everything right”

Good spice on this one, very nice.

I'd even go as far as AB testing is insufficient when we're talking about breaking out of the conditions we're systemically acclimated to. Like all the people who spent hundreds of hours learning Photoshop (or using iOS, whatever) are convinced that it's "intuitive" vs something new.