[rvz]

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.

[bgun]

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.

[rvz]

> 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".

[jimbokun]

Unless it’s on cable.

[bookofjoe]

see also: enshitification

https://feld.com/archives/2025/11/enshitification/

[Cockbrand]

> "Remove this popup" or "Remove this dickover"

> Be honest.

The latter definitely is the more honest answer.

[rvz]

Thank you for "definitely" not being honest.

[userbinator]

You could call them "clickovers".

[rvz]

"popups" or "popovers" is just fine.

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

[defrost]

dickovers are a subset of popups, they are not interchangeable terms.

The derogatory term is for practices that rightfully deserve contempt.

[rvz]

The problem with that is it cannot be used towards people outside of this tech bubble and would just confuse them. It would even fail many profanity filters in chats and forums.

> The derogatory term is for practices that rightfully deserve contempt.

But it doesn't mean that you should expect the layman to use it in common parlance.

Either "Unwanted popup / popover" and even "popup" / "popover" is a far sensible descriptive alternative for the layman than whatever the author is proposing.

[defrost]

> The problem with that is it cannot be used towards people outside of this tech bubble and would just confuse them.

Doubtful ... where did that odd notion spring from?

> It would even fail many profanity filters in chats and forums.

Perhaps in LDS or uber Christian pearl clutching circles, it's absolutely milquetoast in UK / AU Commonwealth English cultures.

eg: UK public broadcast TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbSqdSKaXTw

> But it doesn't mean that you should expect the layman to use it in common parlance.

I'm pretty sure that horse bolted long ago.

[rvz]

> Doubtful ... where did that odd notion spring from?

Searching "Dickover" all over the internet and other than Mastodon (which is heavily used by techies), and the author's blog, it is only being mentioned by techies here.

So of course, you can't ever admit you are in a tech bubble.

> Perhaps in LDS or uber Christian pearl clutching circles, it's absolutely milquetoast in UK / AU Commonwealth English cultures.

Nope. Any platform that has basic censorship tools in chats. Just search "Twitch, YouTube" profanity filter(s).

Even basic filters flags it as profanity here: [0] [1].

> I'm pretty sure that horse bolted long ago.

I'm pretty sure you clearly do not know that.

[0] https://app.readable.com/text/profanity/

[1] https://sapling.ai/utilities/profanity

[joeypickles]

I agree, it’s dumb. I never call those things popovers (is that a regional term?) so the whole time the word was a bit jarring. Also, at first I thought this was a riff on combovers, and imagined some weird male Medusa creature with a thinning head of dicks, and it was so disappointing when that turned out to be wrong.