[re-al]

Not doors, but there are many anti-patterns are intentional - they are there by design!

Eg, "Accept All" cookies - always there. "Reject All"? No. Click preferences, scroll to the bottom, past all the minimised options that hopefully are not selected, then choose the ambiguously named "Confirm my choices" (when I haven't made any choices). This stuff is on purpose! Its there to make you lose the will to live, and just accept whatever crap they have to offer. Like phoning your broadband or energy supplier. Or being able to swap out your phone battery. Or have a machine auto-call or text you to harass you, if you are 1 day late on a payment.

The point is that there is a cash value to many of these 'problems' even if they can be easily engineered away. Its the weaponisation of irritation and hassle, and its ubiquitous in modern living.

Where this ends up, is that we are forced to accept, accept, accept. Its not a great mental state to be in - its the mentality of the prisoner. One cannot help be far less proactive in a modern society - you cannot take things in hand - to get anything done needs to escalated up the ladder.

We are being trained to be timid acceptance lambs. :)

[baby]

You’re talking about dark patterns (specifically the path of least resistance pattern), when the post is about bad design.

[re-al]

Many dark pattern designers, would claim 'bad design' as the excuse. Its hard to read intent, and hard not to suspect malicious intent when there is a cash value on the upside of the 'bad design'.

I have another one - when you pay cash at a machine, and it does not give you the best change, but gives you the heaviest change. Oh and 4-way traffic management guaranteed to cause a huge traffic jam in the name of health and safety, when cars and drivers (and pedestrians) would better manage the road themselves without any assistance. (I suspect the traffic management is training for us to get used to degrading of the roads, so that 'self-driving' cars are able to navigate diversions cos of the traffic lights.)

[quintushoratius]

> it does not give you the best change, but gives you the heaviest change.

"Best change" is an ambiguous term, but also subjective.

> 4-way traffic management guaranteed to cause a huge traffic jam in the name of health and safety, when cars and drivers (and pedestrians) would better manage the road themselves without any assistance.

This, too, is highly debatable and subjective. Ask a pedestrian trying to cross a busy road if there should be signals, or someone trying to make a left across two or more opposing lanes of traffic.

I think you're blaming the wrong thing. High traffic areas all have something in common, and its not traffic signals: it's traffic jams caused by too many cars trying to squeeze into a too-small channel.

[re-al]

Thank you Mr Health and Safety!

[CRConrad]

No, thank you, Mr Mindless Killer.

[fartcannon]

The worst part for me is when my fellow lambs chastise me for trying to take a stand, even just personally.

[re-al]

Well, don't stop investigating then, its your USP :)

[asddubs]

i saw one where you had to click "manage my preferences", and then they put the reject all button at the top, unlike all the other buttons (like accept all). i thought that was kind of clever in an evil way