Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

30

If you think about it, clearly, and logically the default value must be "off". This can be proven if you look at the use cases of the sign in life cycle. Let me explain, by comparing the browsing behavior of two different types of users. User #A will be one who likes remember me disabled, and User #B likes to have it enabled. Let's compare what happens to ...


16

It should be an opt in. What happens if you log in from an Internet Cafe or your mate's laptop and forget to sign out properly? The next person who uses that machine (either a random person of the street or your mate) will be able to log into your account on that site. Now, while that might not be an issue for IMDb or Code Project, it would be a big deal ...


14

If I remember correctly the reason is because the share button allows tracking of users since it's served from facebook/twitter/gplus. So without you clicking on it they already know you are on the site. A two click control gets rid of the tracking while making a inconvenience for the user. Heres a description of the issue


11

A lock is the most commonly used that I have seen, as privacy generally is about locking away or hiding information. Some usable examples are: The recent MEGA logo (copyrighted I'm sure) is a great example, but not one that you can easily use. It does however show a growing understanding of a lock representing privacy.


8

As with any legal contract, both sides, including the user, must agree (“assent”) to the terms and conditions offered with the online service in order to create a legally enforceable “agreement.” In addition, a user can demonstrate agreement in a variety of ways, either by words or by deeds, depending on the circumstances. Online, however, the line ...


5

There are two reasons for this. One, as the other answers have pointed out, is that by default the social media buttons allow those sites to track when you visit the site, so they know where you go and what you view even if you don't touch the buttons. But it's sometimes possible to disable this privacy issue without introducing two-step buttons. You can ...


5

That's because like this the websites prevent Facebook tracking you if you don't click on share. Because Facebook tracks your behaviour if you're logged in to Facebook and visit a page that has the Facebook Share Button implemented. Here is why the Germany Computer Magazine c't explains does it. But that's in German. ...


5

Privacy. Opt-in vs opt-out. While I do usually choose to have a site remember me, there are many people who get upset or creeped out by a site that automatically knows who they are when they return. In general all privacy related activities should be opt-in because of this. In addition, the 'Remember me' box is so short and clear that users will see it and ...


5

It should be disabled by default. User A will be one who likes 'remember me' disabled, and User B likes to have it enabled. A logs-in far more often than B because they prefer not to be remembered. If "remember me" checkbox is enabled by default, A has to untick that box each time they log-in, and that's just a pain. The Proof We can approach this ...


5

If you are only going to show it to them, then it is fine to show it. If someone has signed up with a facebook account, they would have already agreed to allow you to see their profile pic. If you are going to make it publicly viewable, then it is not okay to do it unless you get explicit permission from them first. You could by default not show it and ...


5

No. Always allow the user to opt-in. You could prompt the user the first time the app is ran, with a message explaining why it would be a great idea for them to join, but I would default off. Automatic opt in causes the PERCEPTION of your app to be "shady" for some people. This perception has a big influence on the total UX. And what's more - this can, ...


5

lot of the prominent social websites do have options to close or memoralize an account if a person dies. To quote this article Facebook: To report someone as deceased, Facebook requires documentation, such as a copy of the deceased's death certificate. Upon request, Facebook will "memorialise" the user's page, allowing friends and family to post ...


4

UX studies are almost always about testing things that we either want people to do, or things that we don't want them to do. It is rarely about testing whether they do something that we don't care about from a UX perspective. So it is highly unlikely that you will find a UX study on this. You need to remember that besides just treating your customers ...


4

When I worked in newspapers, this came up quite a bit. A good example, I think, of how to do this for a content-heavy site is the Dallas Morning news. They give away a decent chunk of their news, but denote paid (or premium or however you label it) stories with a small icon, giving clear information that if you're not a subscriber, this isn't a story for ...


4

At present, no. To access his mobile phone number would require a level of access to personal information that would violate privacy laws in most countries. That aside, technically you would have to allow the site to access system level information on the device that firstly isn't possible, and secondly has the potential to be abused if it were available. ...


2

Privacy Simplicity Content emphasis Speed Consistency Privacy - If not all your content is public, seeing a different page that represents what somebody else would see is reassuring. It decreases people's anxiety that they might accidentally have made something public that was intended to be private or vice versa. Simplicity - Although advanced users ...


2

There are two cases for "Remember me" or another check box "keep me signed in" functionality: Case I: When user is using a personal computer / workstation or mobile device , they often opt for remember me option or keep me signed in option to save time for repeated login or use. That's common, most of us would not like to reenter same and same credentials ...


2

From a usability standpoint, yes. Efficiency dictates that you use implied agreement. From a legality perspective, no. You should explicitly ensure users are aware of what they are agreeing to. Explicit agreements are generally enforceable. These are usually in the form of checking a box that says you agree, or by clicking a button that says you agree. ...


2

There are two general types of agreements with online terms and conditions. Explicit agreements are generally enforceable. These are usually in the form of checking a box that says you agree, or by clicking a button that says you agree. Implicit agreements are unenforceable and have no legal weight. These are when you have something that says "by ...


2

You should never perform an action that a user doesn't expect you to perform (outside of customer service of course). So the question then comes down to whether or not an average user would expect you to clear the cache. If you are talking about gloabal cache clearing, then you should never clear it automatically whenever a user starts a session. If you ...


2

Personally, I don't look through a website's privacy policy unless I upload my own content (i.e. pictures, videos, etc) on the site. I've always found private policies pages to be unfriendly in nature. Just like most things, there are specific bits of information most users would want to know first (if they sell your information, share it with the public, ...


2

I would not automatically request their location. In addition to the privacy concerns you have, some amount of users will not access your site from their "home" location (at work, on their mobile, etc.), and they'll be forced to delete and re-enter information about their home city. Instead, maybe consider a "Use My Current Location" button near the form ...


2

The minimal information might be called mandatory information in the context of government organizations because they have to comply with personal and privacy information that mandates only the minimal information is required to complete tasks/transactions. However, I think the lines are rather blurred as you say, when there are no clear guidelines and it is ...


1

My initial concern is that children under the age of 18 most likely have an email address (most of them have Facebook, after all!), so they're going to enter their own email address and bypass the parental permission issue. More to your main point-- I might create a hoverover or hyperlink with the text "What will my child be doing on this site?" or "Before ...


1

I think for the most part, you are correct about the 2-step process. A well-known study in human-human communication showed that just using the word "because" gave people a greater chance of jumping forward in a queue than the exact same phrase/explanation without this word (reference: "Influence" by Robert Cialdini). Sometimes, the "2-step" process is ...


1

Opt-in is far better than opt-out for user perception - and probably regulatory issues as well if you are in some region (e.g. EU) which has strict privacy and data protection standards. As Don Nickel pointed out, negative perception is a likely result of sneaky default-checked prompts, I can attest that personally I am far more suspicious of such sites or ...


1

It should not be, this is one of those situations where you go tot he core principles and do what's right for the customers. In long term sticking to core principles would add tremendous value to business, but if one deviates, it's a slippery slope. Be the voice for customer. Still, the data is valuable.. see how you can enourge users to accept it.. Tell ...


1

An eye works for this purpose, and it explicitly refers to the potential agent(s) who might 'see' what data is not private (arguably the most important piece of the picture), rather than to the data itself. Internet Explorer used this for a long time, which means a huge potential audience is experienced with it. A mask or other way of concealing the ...


1

Something I have noticed with Facebook logins: the more permissions you ask for the less people will use it. A permissions access box with 5 items is more likely to be aborted than one with 2 items. Also you already mentioned the risk of users feeling the site is intruding on their privacy by showing a picture So the question then becomes, is the benefit ...


1

You have to ensure that users feel in control of their profiles on your site, regardless if they use Facebook to sign in or not. Whenever you are deciding on displaying a profile image, consider the appropriateness of the situation. For this application, is the profile image going to be seen by other users? Some users may not want their Facebook picture ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible