Stop the Slow Lane

by bfeld • 12 years ago

186 50 12 years ago

Please let me know if you have any problems or feedback on the widget. I've also tried to set it up to be easy to remix and add your own slowdown animations (more info coming soon!)

cr3ative• 12 years ago

I'm not 100% sure that annoying your visitors is the best way to either retain said visitors OR warm them to your cause.

billyarzt• 12 years ago

Wasn't that the strategy prior to the SOPA vote when Wikipedia blacked out? It seems the strategy is more to give everyday internet users an idea of what life would be like if this was passed.

bfeld2• 12 years ago

We are going to add more context to the splash page.

bradleyjoyce• 12 years ago

While I understand the sentiment, this seems more likely to just encourage site visitors to hit the back button rather than take the desired action.

xwowsersx• 12 years ago

I disagree. If the site is somewhat heavily trafficked already (which is the kind of site that will actually have an impact), then they'll wait.

exelius7• 12 years ago

Heavily trafficked sites are already paying for a "fast lane" in the form of CDNs that cache everything but dynamic content. These CDNs already have interconnect agreements with the large ISPs (and have for years).

higherpurpose• 12 years ago

Think about someone visiting your site for first time. They'll just think something is wrong with your website. So it needs some context. It should say somewhere that this is a form of protest against FCC's new Internet rules. Get inspired by some of the SOPA blackout messages, like the one from Wikipedia for example, to see how it should be done right, but instead of a "black image" covering the screen, they could get the slow loading animation:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Wikipedia...

There should absolutely be a call to action to Congress representatives and FCC, too.

level• 12 years ago

The closing quote on the <script src"..."> tag in the "1. Add slowlane.js to Your Website" section is missing. Not really an issue, but it looks unprofessional.

rubbingalcohol4• 12 years ago

Actually it was an issue. It would break entire websites >_<

Thanks for the heads up.

nkozyra3• 12 years ago

For some reason this seems to be the go-to "show 'em" methodology. I think people, in general, understand what slower means.

I mean this is cute but I think this might be the fourth or fifth implementation I've seen and they all have better likelihood of just annoying someone instead of educating them.

I realize a standardized alert message delivered via JS doesn't have the same "share-able" impact, but it's probably more effective overall.

I'm imagining Wikipedia's fundraising drives and whether they'd do as well if they just blurred out a large portion of every article to raise awareness versus a prominent message.

bfeld2• 12 years ago

We are considering an option that blurs out the page instead. Also - we'll add more context to the page.

nkozyra3• 12 years ago

I think you may have missed my point there.

natzim• 12 years ago

It would be nice if the user were able to disable it once they got the message.

rubbingalcohol4• 12 years ago

It will only show up once per user, unless you throw in a URL parameter for it to always show up.

CodeMage2• 12 years ago

Condescension is not exactly the best way to win people over to your cause.

area51org3• 12 years ago

I don't think this is condescension. It's more like a demonstration for the policy makers.

exelius7• 12 years ago

How do you know this is what will happen?

holmesworcester4• 12 years ago

can you tell us more about why it feels condescending?

CodeMage2• 12 years ago

It feels condescending because people don't really need an exaggerated demonstration of what the word "slow" means. I agree that people need to be made aware that what FCC is doing is going to make things slower for regular users, but this is excessive.

Istof• 12 years ago

Do they define the "slow lane" as the speed you are paying for and the "fast lane" as some "free" bandwidth (paid by companies)?

swswsw• 12 years ago

perhaps it should be a button on the website, like "experience the site with FCC's Slow Lane".

That way, they can see what the site is like and if they choose to press the button, they can see what it is like to be on the slow lane. Otherwise, the first time visitor may not give the site a chance at all.

holmesworcester4• 12 years ago

If it's a site you visit regularly, it's likely to make you really curious, right?

We're making a version that's just an anigif that people can embed. That should be live really soon. So, that works for people who don't want to interrupt visitors with a message.

eastbayjake• 12 years ago

I would have signed the petition if it weren't being done through MoveOn.org -- really don't want to end up on their mailing list.

justizin• 12 years ago

which petition site's mailing list do you want to end up on? ;)

rubbingalcohol4• 12 years ago

What do you all think of this alternate version of the loader that rips on Comcast?

http://rubbingalcoholic.com/#ALWAYS_SHOW_SL_WIDGET_COMCAST

If anyone wants to help out with this or give me feedback directly, please email me jeff@rubbingalcoholic.com

danray2• 12 years ago

Be careful -- practically speaking, using Comcast's and TWC's names/logos is more likely to attract their attention early, and will give their lawyers a stronger argument (against Github or third-party sites) to have it taken down.

aroch• 12 years ago

     will give their lawyers a stronger argument

No it won't. Using the name and marks of the FCC to dicuss policy and actions by the FCC is clearly fair use.

orthecreedence• 12 years ago

I think this gets the point across more clearly, and I'd be much more likely to install this on my sites. The fact that you're immediately giving at least some context would make me a lot less confused as a user, and the site loading in the background makes it obvious that I'm in the right place to begin with.

While you guys obviously have a message to get out (a great message), you may want to consider adding a link someone could click to get rid of the widget and load the site immediately. Imagine that you saw four sites with the widget, then emailed your congresspeople, and now you have to keep dealing with them all throughout the day even if you already took action...it'd be annoying.

Thanks for all the work on this!

dpe822• 12 years ago

How about something that much more closely resembles slow page loading? Pop an explainer / action callout modal while the page slowly reveals itself, something like this:

http://jsfiddle.net/dpemmons/3zSSk/3/embedded/result/

dpe822• 12 years ago

Also, let's not confuse people. The target is the FCC. We want people to contact FCC and complain about their (proposed) policies. If you're going to involve brands and logos, use theirs.

crzrcn• 12 years ago

Another idea is to provide a banner with a good message and a "toggle" button for the slow lane. So users can experiemnt it, but be in control as not to harm the product experience. Maybe it's too passive?

alialkhatib• 12 years ago

I don't think this is the right approach. I realize that the principle is fundamentally the same with SOPA protests (depriving users of content to highlight the danger of this passing), but there's a more salient argument that you could make here if you really wanted.

Why not implement a loading bar that actually progressed slowly and then put a brief explanation underneath the loading bar describing the FCC "slow lane" and how it would negatively impact users?

To add insult to injury, give the user 3 options:

- pay the site owner to access the "fast lane" to your content

- send an email (to FCC chair? maybe a representative?) to voice their anger

- get used to waiting; that'll be the new norm if nobody prevents this, right?

The first option would be incredibly controversial, but would underscore how objectionable the "Slow Lane" idea even is. If anyone is stubborn enough to pay, you could funnel that money into the EFF or some other relevant organization.

The point is that just throwing people a loading screen (especially without a good explanation) will leave the user confused. Once the content loads they'll probably forget about that loading screen anyway (at least on a conscious level), so don't wait until afterward to explain what just happened.

As an aside, there was a comment that users will wait for a website that's sufficiently highly trafficked, but I don't think that's true. I remember some Google presentation[0] where an engineer explained that virtually any extra loading time was enough to discourage users from returning. Maybe that's just with search or other highly interactive sites (rather than reading a blog, for example), but I wouldn't want to test that hypothesis with any site I cared about and managed.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il4swGfTOSM - The "impact of slow sites" comes up early on.

holmesworcester4• 12 years ago

We're adding more explanation to the loading screen. Also, for folks who don't want to interrupt users, here's an anigif to post. http://imgur.com/PQRaxNa (putting this up on the site now)

mrcactu5• 12 years ago

I don't think end-users will get the message. Can you illustrate to them how much slower their service will be as a result of rising costs?

Stop the Slow Lane

Related Stories