148 pointsby tambourine_man3 hours ago25 comments
  • freetime22 hours ago
    Thank you, I got a good laugh out of that.

    My experience was probably exactly as intended. Click on the "What is a dickover?" link trying to come up with things that it might be. And a brief moment after the page loaded (this little pause is crucial) I am hit in the face with a big annoying popup saying "This is a Dickover" followed by immediate understanding.

    Now at least I know what to call it the next time I visit Substack.

  • freediveran hour ago
    One of criteria for inclusion into Kagi Small Web [1] is no dickovers. Thanks for naming it properly John.

    [1] https://kagi.com/smallweb

    • buggy625715 minutes ago
      FYI it took me 3 clicks of “next” to hit a page with a cookie dickover. Might need to tweak the filter.
      • freediver8 minutes ago
        Flag it please, want to think you were unlocky/page added it after inclusion. It is still a manual effort to verify them, mistakes happen. Definetely not intended.
    • hootz43 minutes ago
      Oh, Vlad is here. Thanks for Kagi, and spread these thanks to all Kagi employees too! Please adopt dickover.
  • michaelt2 hours ago
    I have a theory that about 97% of developers and managers completed the cookie consent (or whatever) on their own product 5 years ago and hence never see it again, and they have no idea how bad the experience for new customers actually is.

    So the developers and bosses all think they're doing a great job and they've got a carefully curated homepage, even though the regular users get a cloudflare captcha, then a cookie modal, then a newsletter modal, then an install-our-app modal, all blocking their access to the 'buy product' button.

    • JKCalhoun44 minutes ago
      I have a theory that they don't care what customers think.
      • kcplate37 minutes ago
        Oh we care, but when it comes to cookie dickovers, we care more about making the corporate lawyers happy.

        I’ll admit that I definitely like collecting my paycheck much more than I worry about customer annoyance at acknowledging a cookie policy. Some hills ain't worth dying on.

        • SoftTalker9 minutes ago
          Or your company could respect its users and only use cookies for essential site functions. Then you don't need a dickover.
    • LeoPantheraan hour ago
      Always test your website in a private window.
    • tardedmeme2 hours ago
      I wonder if cloudflare is wise enough to always skip captchas from IP addresses it detects are associated with that website's owners.
  • skybrianan hour ago
    Did you know that a Substack's author can turn the annoying popup off? Go to dashboard -> settings, and then it's "Enable subscribe prompts on post page" under "Growth."

    It's the first thing I did. Recommended.

    • dnnddidiej22 minutes ago
      I sort of make an exception for that popup. I.e. I don't mind seeing it. It's the tax to get good free content.

      Medium forcing you to log in is too much tho.

      • SoftTalker5 minutes ago
        I don't at all mind a link on the page that directs me to a subscription or notification signup.

        If I get a popup, I'm pretty likely to just close the page, especially if I'm on mobile where closing them is more trouble.

    • dangusan hour ago
      We all know why they keep it on.

      I’m just kind of surprised that it works to convert people.

      Or…maybe it doesn’t?

      Some of these things that we have are just common practices that owners of websites do that are seemingly done automatically without much thought to the experience.

  • andaian hour ago
    I explicitly disable these on Substack but it adds them to my posts anyway. I'm not sure if that's a bug or the thing working as intended, but it was enough to make me stop using it. I don't want to do that to my readers.
    • lostlogin38 minutes ago
      Substack’s dubious practices aren’t as bad as their dubious politics.

      https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/feb/07/revealed-how-s...

      • alsetmusica minute ago
        Oh yay, the nazi content again. Don't let the Feb 2026 article date fool you, this has been talked about for years and they don't lift a finger. It's like how Meta isn't incentivized to block scams because they profit off of them to the tune of a billion dollars a year.

        However, I do appreciate white supremacist trash outing themselves in public. Get it on the record. Some of them try to hide, but: Patriot Front had a huge leak of data in 2022 (400GB).

        "Patriot Front Fascist Leak Exposes Nationwide Racist Campaigns"[0]

        You can download it at the following torrent address:

        magnet:?xt=urn:btih:2c87816e4c81990fb25bbca43dd8d578eaa55886&dn=patriotfront&tr=udp%3A%2F%2F9.rarbg.to%3A2920&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.opentrackr.org%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fexodus.desync.com%3A6969

        I'm seeding this on a permanent basis. I have gigabit uplink. Please leach and share.

        0. https://unicornriot.ninja/2022/patriot-front-fascist-leak-ex...

      • jpttsn11 minutes ago
        Thanks for linking to a cookie banner
  • albert_e44 minutes ago
    Need of the hour :

    Browser personalization tools or extensions ...

    A combination of User stylesheet (stylus) or User scripts (greasemonkey) -- superpowered by AI models that can let users target screen elements and shape webpage display and behavior without having to manually deal with precise DOM elements or CSS JS syntax

    Best useful tweaks could become part of a curated list like uOrigin ad block lists

  • paradoxyl36 minutes ago
    "Login with your Google or some other globalist public-private tyrannical spyware trash" is the most common "dickover" around.
  • hootz2 hours ago
    DO YOU CONSENT WITH OUR TRACKING COOKIES POLICY?

    [YES, I DO, THE IMPORTANT TRACKING ONES] [YES, I DO, ALL OF THEM] ⁿᵒ ᵃⁿᵈ ᶜˡᵒˢᵉ ᵈᶦᶜᵏᵒᵛᵉʳ

    • internet20002 hours ago
      Thanks, Europe!
      • tardedmeme2 hours ago
        Yep. Without Europe, we'd have no idea which websites were trying to sell us out to the highest bidder.
        • rubyfanan hour ago
          Surprise, they all are!
      • dnnddidiej20 minutes ago
        Europe is why you have CCPA
  • -warrenan hour ago
    Dickovers are annoying -- tell me, what's your solution? For me, a combination of a) not patronizing these sites, but when I have to b) some ad blockers help. Nothing seems to work well though.
    • pennomi39 minutes ago
      I don’t know if there’s a personal solution to this but the societal solution is to penalize dickovers at the SEO level.
  • bayesnetan hour ago
    The only surprising thing about the Tom’s Hardware example was that John Gruber evidently does not use an adblocker
  • userbinatoran hour ago
    Did anyone else think this was a clever keming pun?

    Fortunately, for those sites where either JS is required for the content or to remove the dickover, browsers still have an Inspect Element tool that makes deleting this and other annoyances not too difficult and rather cathartic.

  • cocacola12 hours ago
    Never thought to call them dickovers before, but it’s apt. At a certain point, I noticed my finger reflexively hitting the ESC key because that usually dismisses a lot of them.
    • Brendinooo2 hours ago
      The Escape key's effect in the linked article was a delightful detail.
  • chrsw2 hours ago
    Yeah this is really bad. Firefox + uBlock Origin + Filters cleans a lot of these dickovers. Some seem to slip through the cracks. There's a never ending fight between bad websites and the warriors trying to protect our attention.
  • LeoPantheraan hour ago
    Does big tech understand consent?

    [ ] Yes

    [ ] Maybe later

  • an hour ago
    undefined
  • abrowne2 hours ago
    Any site I visit regularly gets a user stylesheet via Stylus that I use to hide anything like this.
  • JoshTriplettan hour ago
    > They’re popovers, but dickheaded.

    So they're popovers.

    Seriously. I've never seen a popover used for any legitimate purpose. If it was the content the user wanted, you can put it in the page where it goes.

    • JKCalhoun38 minutes ago
      Only time… I added a popover [1] in order to get a user click so I could enable sound.

      I know, I know, but it's a game site. It needs sound! [2]

      [1] https://mooncraft2000.com

      [2] Damn, I just tried my site again and a recent Safari has blocked my weak attempt to force sound.

  • annoyingnooban hour ago
    The web needs more 'Get Bent' buttons.
  • analogpixel2 hours ago
    Maybe if people don't like dickovers, paywalls, and all the other bad patterns , they should stop submitting and voting them up.
  • JKCalhoun3 hours ago
    Wow, yeah, fuck off with the dickovers.

    My own blog has none of that crap. No Google analytics, no tracking. If someone visits my site, I have no idea. And I don't care.

    • king_zee2 hours ago
      Most people don't care about this and they should, I have the google analytics import on my business endeavors, but why would I put it into a blog? Why subject both myself and my poor readers to yet another tentacle to suck our interaction into its googolplex of data. I hope all webdevs start caring more. On that same note, I hope all webdevs stop using substack, it's so trivial nowadays to make and style your own blog however you want, why take the even lazier route of giving substack control over everything
      • JKCalhounan hour ago
        So, here on HN, some years back, when I said as much (about my blog having no analytics, etc.) I was asked why did I even blog?

        I've always thought of blogging as just writing a note, dropping it in a bottle and tossing it. No idea what happens to it once I post it.

  • echelon3 hours ago
    Gruber's usually too much of a walking Apple ad for my taste, but I love this.

    We need to define the things we hate. Give them words. Use the words as weapons.

    I've been thinking about this a lot recently with "watermarks" of the statistical and non-visible kind used to track image creators. (Google embedding "this image is AI but also here's the user ID".)

    I've been thinking that practice needs a new word too. It's not watermarking, it's signals-math based tracking, so maybe sigtracked.

    That might not sound gross enough though.

    • happytoexplain2 hours ago
      I find the characterisation of his Apple praise fascinating. It's really not that zealous, unless you hate Apple (which is fine). I think this image of him speaks more of the prominence of the Apple superfan image in popular culture than the actual reality of his position.
      • murderfs2 hours ago
        It isn't anymore, but if you go back a decade or two, it really was that zealous. He really did used to blindly defend Apple (e.g. things like this: https://daringfireball.net/2006/09/open_challenge), but I think he's grown more skeptical of Apple lately.
        • dfxm122 hours ago
          I don't want to split hairs over what constitutes as overzealous, but I will say that Apple ~20 years ago earned more praise than Apple does today. This is probably reflected in the writing.
    • y1n02 hours ago
      It's more than just defining things. It's ridiculing them.
  • pooploop64an hour ago
    Fanboys Annoyances List for Ublock. Install it on your family's computers when they aren't looking. It aims to filter ALL this crap.
  • rvz2 hours ago
    I'm sorry but this is such a stupid name. Where did the author get this name from?

    Why would I say that in front of any female colleage or any non-technical layman? We already have a name for this and it is a "popup".

    Which sounds better?

    "Remove this popup" or "Remove this dickover"

    Be honest.

    • bgun2 hours ago
      I agree, but being mildly offensive is kind of the point: makes it more memorable, and clearly differentiated from “popup” which is too broad and has many valid uses in an interface. Dickovers never have a valid reason to exist.
      • rvz7 minutes ago
        > makes it more memorable, and clearly differentiated from “popup” which is too broad and has many valid uses in an interface. Dickovers never have a valid reason to exist.

        This is hardly convincing. The author even describes it as a "popup" or a "popover" which is already descriptive enough without further explanation. It is just an "unwanted popup" or "unwanted popover".

        The fact he brought up a definition of that word after mentioning "popover", just made the need for "d*ckover" uneccessarily redundant.

        It may work with 30 people in tech, but will not work on TV. "unwanted popup" or "unwanted popover" is better to say on TV than "d*ckover".

    • Cockbrand2 hours ago
      > "Remove this popup" or "Remove this dickover"

      > Be honest.

      The latter definitely is the more honest answer.

      • rvz28 minutes ago
        Thank you for "definitely" not being honest.
    • userbinatoran hour ago
      You could call them "clickovers".
      • rvz30 minutes ago
        "popups" or "popovers" is just fine.

        Both of them are shorter than the "dickovers" or "clickovers" nonsense.

        • defrost24 minutes ago
          dickovers are a subset of popups, they are not interchangeable terms.

          The derogatory term is for practices that rightfully deserve contempt.

  • nicechiantian hour ago
    [dead]
  • avaer2 hours ago
    I don't get why people feel entitled to _not_ get dickovers. Are you paying for what you're using, to a sufficient degree that the ecosystem can work without the dickover being presented to you?

    This shouldn't be the user's problem, but this is the market working. The dickovers are there because someone somewhere is making money because the dickovers are there. Saying you want the content without the spam is more or less saying you want other people to do the work and you don't want to pay for it.

    If you don't like ads/dickovers, you don't have to use the site/app. The provider has decided you're not worth it. To be fair, you probably aren't making them money.

    There are exceptions, but you shouldn't feel entitled to use the thing without paying the "dickover price" that the provider has decided to charge.

    • chrsw2 hours ago
      I guess the entitlement comes from looking at it from the other way: my employer pays me a lot for my attention. I've accepted the arrangement so now I pay attention to their problems. If you want me to pay attention to your problem, there has to be something in it for me.

      I've been wondering how we can use AI to clean up websites before they hit our eyes. If AI is as good as they say it is, surely it can clean up dickovers. If someone is allowed to shove something in front of my face should I not be allowed to make them invisible?

      • avaer2 hours ago
        > If someone is allowed to shove something in front of my face should I not be allowed to make them invisible?

        Yes, I'm 100% on the adblock train. Local AI adblock sounds like a great solution.

        Then maybe dickovers will go away when the market realizes they don't work. That's the only way.

        What won't help is complaining that the largely free products we get don't work the way we want them to.

        • pooploop64an hour ago
          >What won't help is complaining that the largely free products we get don't work the way we want them to. This makes no sense and seems bad-faith on multiple levels.
          • avaeran hour ago
            On the contrary, I'm assuming good faith on the part of those who implement these "dark" patterns.

            They're done for a reason, and that reason is not pure evil from their perspective.

    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
    • projektfu2 hours ago
      It must be worth a lot for me to see it, because if I land on a site shopping for something, I might just turn around when you interrupt me and force me to actively not sign up for your email list.
      • avaeran hour ago
        You should turn around! That's literally my point.

        If everyone refused to touch a site that blasts you with a dickover, they would disappear overnight. Clearly people do not do this enough, because it's still being implemented.

    • what2 hours ago
      No one is making money on cookie consent dickovers, which is the majority of them.
      • TurdF3rguson30 minutes ago
        Generally, if you're setting cookies that aren't necessary for your website's operation... there's some financial motive for it.
      • 2 hours ago
        undefined
    • 8675309tan hour ago
      Bootlicker
      • avaeran hour ago
        I'm not in this industry. I block basically everything. I think the state of these design antipatterns is terrible.

        But this is a Chesterton's Fence problem and we need to understand where it came from if we're going to fix it.