Adaptive UIs (web or otherwise)

9 Jun 2008 - 9:12am
6 years ago
18 replies
962 reads
Dave Malouf
2005

Technology Review (MIT's innovation rag) has an article on Adaptive
UIs for the web.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/20872/

What do people think about this? Does it scale?
from an IxD perspective?

-- dave

--
David Malouf
http://synapticburn.com/
http://ixda.org/
http://motorola.com/

Comments

9 Jun 2008 - 9:19am
Mark Canlas
2003

My gut reaction was "oh no, it's personalized favorites menu all over
again". I like giving Microsoft a chance, and I like giving new technology a
chance, but that was generally regarded as one of the worst user interaction
mechanics in all of Office history, for the reasons that it ran (slightly)
contrary to muscle memory.

I can't seem to phrase this properly right now, but it's like... What if the
user wanted to do something that they usually don't do. These types of
systems tuck away less-oft used functionality, making for a really
frustrating user experience that one time.

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:12 AM, David Malouf <dave.ixd at gmail.com> wrote:

> Technology Review (MIT's innovation rag) has an article on Adaptive
> UIs for the web.
> http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/20872/
>
> What do people think about this? Does it scale?
> from an IxD perspective?
>
> -- dave
>
> --
> David Malouf
> http://synapticburn.com/
> http://ixda.org/
> http://motorola.com/
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

9 Jun 2008 - 9:48am
Jack L. Moffett
2005

How many times have you misjudged a person due to a poor first
impression? It seems to me that 10 clicks is an awfully small amount
of data that could easily be misinterpreted. And once the site has
been adapted, how hard is it to find the graphs (or whatever) that
the site decided you aren't interested in?

I guess, given the little information the article offered, I am
doubtful.

Jack

Jack L. Moffett
Interaction Designer
inmedius
412.459.0310 x219
http://www.inmedius.com

In our society,
the scarce factor is not information,
it is time to attend to information.

- Herb Simon

9 Jun 2008 - 9:45am
Danny Hope
2008

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:12 PM, David Malouf <dave.ixd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Technology Review (MIT's innovation rag) has an article on Adaptive
> UIs for the web.
> http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/20872/
>
> What do people think about this? Does it scale?
> from an IxD perspective?

It does not scale and I expect a better experience could be arrived-at
through application of traditional usability techniques.

While I think the tool should remember the preference, does the user
know they've expressed a preference?

There are potential problems in showing the site to a friend (who
might have a different "style of thinking").

--

Regards,
Danny Hope
http://hobointernet.com
+44 (0)845 230 3760

9 Jun 2008 - 9:49am
Jennifer Vignone
2008

I am a user who doesn't appreciate when a system "guesses" what I might
like. The use of that word makes me nervous for myself as a user and for a
client of mine where "guessing" may just not be reliable or accurate
enough, leading to more frustration.

If the guessing also is based on click that the user makes as part of a
basic site exploration and not something they might wish to be guesses on
(like when I get Amazon recommendations when I was just clicking around
looking for random things I don't plan to ever buy), that serves to
confuse the interface rather than customize it for the user in a
meaningful way.

9 Jun 2008 - 10:18am
Jeff Garbers
2008

On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:49 AM, jennifer.r.vignone at jpmorgan.com wrote:

> I am a user who doesn't appreciate when a system "guesses" what I
> might like. The use of that word makes me nervous for myself as a
> user and for a client of mine where "guessing" may just not be
> reliable or accurate enough, leading to more frustration.

I think "guessing" is fine as long as it's peripheral to the main line
of interaction. Autocomplete is a simple example of this idea -- I
can just type and if I happen to notice that the software has
"guessed" what I want, I can save some typing time and click it. But
if something popped up and said "Hey, it looks like you're typing
SMITH, is that what you want?" I'd uninstall the app in a heartbeat.

Guesses -- or, let's say, "reasonable heuristics" -- are often also
appropriate when providing default values: the application has already
filled in certain fields based on what you've done in the past. Of
course you have to be careful when the data is critical; you might not
want to assume, for example, that the radiation dosage this time would
be the same as last time and get people in the habit of just clicking
past the form.

9 Jun 2008 - 10:28am
Mark Canlas
2003

I see it more of what areas are designated as dynamic versus static. There
are tons of recommendation systems out there (Amazon) and no one complains
about the change of the content, because it's pretty much never moving. The
content changes, but the hotspots themselves do not.

Here, we're talking about huge moving targets, like entire content modules
on a page, even the navigation bars maybe. And that, I think is the sin
here.

I don't think anyone will disagree that autocomplete is useful because it
helps supplement the experience of inputting text into a box. It doesn't
disguise/change it.

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Jeff Garbers <jgarbers at xltsoftware.com>
wrote:

> On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:49 AM, jennifer.r.vignone at jpmorgan.com wrote:
>
> I am a user who doesn't appreciate when a system "guesses" what I might
>> like. The use of that word makes me nervous for myself as a user and for a
>> client of mine where "guessing" may just not be reliable or accurate enough,
>> leading to more frustration.
>>
>
> I think "guessing" is fine as long as it's peripheral to the main line of
> interaction. Autocomplete is a simple example of this idea -- I can just
> type and if I happen to notice that the software has "guessed" what I want,
> I can save some typing time and click it. But if something popped up and
> said "Hey, it looks like you're typing SMITH, is that what you want?" I'd
> uninstall the app in a heartbeat.
>
> Guesses -- or, let's say, "reasonable heuristics" -- are often also
> appropriate when providing default values: the application has already
> filled in certain fields based on what you've done in the past. Of course
> you have to be careful when the data is critical; you might not want to
> assume, for example, that the radiation dosage this time would be the same
> as last time and get people in the habit of just clicking past the form.
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

9 Jun 2008 - 10:37am
Jennifer Vignone
2008

I think it might be useful to ask the user before modules of content were
moved, switched, auto-populated, etc. before actually doing so in an
interface.
Perhaps a feature where such a thing could be turned on or off, along the
lines or "Don't show this to me again" or "Remind/Ask me later" adapted to
suit this need.
Perhaps also a single click to return to a default view so the user could
escape the changing environment and revisit missed items.

I see it more of what areas are designated as dynamic versus static. There
are tons of recommendation systems out there (Amazon) and no one complains
about the change of the content, because it's pretty much never moving.
The
content changes, but the hotspots themselves do not.

Here, we're talking about huge moving targets, like entire content modules
on a page, even the navigation bars maybe. And that, I think is the sin
here.

I don't think anyone will disagree that autocomplete is useful because it
helps supplement the experience of inputting text into a box. It doesn't
disguise/change it.

9 Jun 2008 - 11:40am
Jeff Howard
2004

Has anyone actually used this design? My guess is that it's
impossible to accurately speculate about how good or bad this is
without trying it and without being tainted by pre-knowledge of its
adaptive behavior. It all depends on the execution.

There are plenty of poor examples of adaptive UIs, but there are
great examples too.

Quicksilver is an adaptive example that I love. It's guessing and
learning all the time. And right out of the box it's more than a
little dumb. But over time it has learned what I tend to search for
and serves it up practically the moment my fingers hit the keyboard.

Another example that's closer to the MIT example was the BBC
redesign described a few years ago.

http://www.liamdelahunty.com/blog/media/theglasswall.pdf

Instead of shifting the location of content, it highlighted
particular paths through the content, based on past behavior so that
frequently clicked areas grew more prominent over time. Like a
well-trampled path across a lawn.

// jeff

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=30025

9 Jun 2008 - 12:05pm
Bojhan
2007

I agree with this statement, as moving around entire conten modules is
all bad all the way. I do think that pushing towards more adaptive
interfaces is a positive development as in web application envoirments
where you need to support several audiences you either run into scale
issues or slowly become more and more bloated. Where making assumptions
on the current knowledge level of the user can greatly impact usability
and chaning over time as current knowledge level also changes.

I wrote an article on this at my blog some time ago, in which I put up
some slides of Stephen P.Anderson his talk on this subject.

Jeff Garbers do you have an example that is less extreme, as I cant
really think of any other the financial or medical forms?

Bojhan Somers
www.bojhan.nl

Mark Canlas schreef:
> I see it more of what areas are designated as dynamic versus static. There
> are tons of recommendation systems out there (Amazon) and no one complains
> about the change of the content, because it's pretty much never moving. The
> content changes, but the hotspots themselves do not.
>
> Here, we're talking about huge moving targets, like entire content modules
> on a page, even the navigation bars maybe. And that, I think is the sin
> here.
>
> I don't think anyone will disagree that autocomplete is useful because it
> helps supplement the experience of inputting text into a box. It doesn't
> disguise/change it.
>
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Jeff Garbers <jgarbers at xltsoftware.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:49 AM, jennifer.r.vignone at jpmorgan.com wrote:
>>
>> I am a user who doesn't appreciate when a system "guesses" what I might
>>
>>> like. The use of that word makes me nervous for myself as a user and for a
>>> client of mine where "guessing" may just not be reliable or accurate enough,
>>> leading to more frustration.
>>>
>>>
>> I think "guessing" is fine as long as it's peripheral to the main line of
>> interaction. Autocomplete is a simple example of this idea -- I can just
>> type and if I happen to notice that the software has "guessed" what I want,
>> I can save some typing time and click it. But if something popped up and
>> said "Hey, it looks like you're typing SMITH, is that what you want?" I'd
>> uninstall the app in a heartbeat.
>>
>> Guesses -- or, let's say, "reasonable heuristics" -- are often also
>> appropriate when providing default values: the application has already
>> filled in certain fields based on what you've done in the past. Of course
>> you have to be careful when the data is critical; you might not want to
>> assume, for example, that the radiation dosage this time would be the same
>> as last time and get people in the habit of just clicking past the form.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>
>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>
>
>
>

9 Jun 2008 - 12:52pm
Jennifer Vignone
2008

How do you know that no one complains about them?

>
>I see it more of what areas are designated as dynamic versus static. There
>are tons of recommendation systems out there (Amazon) and no one complains
>about the change of the content, because it's pretty much never moving. The
>content changes, but the hotspots themselves do not.
>

9 Jun 2008 - 4:09pm
Bojhan
2007

Hey, Jeff

Well in the case of adaptive interfaces making the easy assumptions
should be fairly do-able, but can you give an example where you need to
make guesses in a more dangerous envoirment? I was looking for some, but
untill now I couldnt really come up with viable ones.

Jeff Garbers schreef:
> Hi, Bojhan! Are you asking for an example where autocomplete or
> guessing is less dangerous, or what? I'll post back to the list once
> I'm clear on what you're asking... thanks!
>
> On Jun 9, 2008, at 1:05 PM, Bojhan Somers wrote:
>
>> I agree with this statement, as moving around entire conten modules
>> is all bad all the way. I do think that pushing towards more adaptive
>> interfaces is a positive development as in web application
>> envoirments where you need to support several audiences you either
>> run into scale issues or slowly become more and more bloated. Where
>> making assumptions on the current knowledge level of the user can
>> greatly impact usability and chaning over time as current knowledge
>> level also changes.
>>
>> I wrote an article on this at my blog some time ago, in which I put
>> up some slides of Stephen P.Anderson his talk on this subject.
>>
>> Jeff Garbers do you have an example that is less extreme, as I cant
>> really think of any other the financial or medical forms?
>>
>> Bojhan Somers
>> www.bojhan.nl
>>
>> Mark Canlas schreef:
>>> I see it more of what areas are designated as dynamic versus static.
>>> There
>>> are tons of recommendation systems out there (Amazon) and no one
>>> complains
>>> about the change of the content, because it's pretty much never
>>> moving. The
>>> content changes, but the hotspots themselves do not.
>>>
>>> Here, we're talking about huge moving targets, like entire content
>>> modules
>>> on a page, even the navigation bars maybe. And that, I think is the sin
>>> here.
>>>
>>> I don't think anyone will disagree that autocomplete is useful
>>> because it
>>> helps supplement the experience of inputting text into a box. It
>>> doesn't
>>> disguise/change it.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Jeff Garbers
>>> <jgarbers at xltsoftware.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:49 AM, jennifer.r.vignone at jpmorgan.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am a user who doesn't appreciate when a system "guesses" what I
>>>> might
>>>>
>>>>> like. The use of that word makes me nervous for myself as a user
>>>>> and for a
>>>>> client of mine where "guessing" may just not be reliable or
>>>>> accurate enough,
>>>>> leading to more frustration.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I think "guessing" is fine as long as it's peripheral to the main
>>>> line of
>>>> interaction. Autocomplete is a simple example of this idea -- I
>>>> can just
>>>> type and if I happen to notice that the software has "guessed" what
>>>> I want,
>>>> I can save some typing time and click it. But if something popped
>>>> up and
>>>> said "Hey, it looks like you're typing SMITH, is that what you
>>>> want?" I'd
>>>> uninstall the app in a heartbeat.
>>>>
>>>> Guesses -- or, let's say, "reasonable heuristics" -- are often also
>>>> appropriate when providing default values: the application has already
>>>> filled in certain fields based on what you've done in the past. Of
>>>> course
>>>> you have to be careful when the data is critical; you might not
>>>> want to
>>>> assume, for example, that the radiation dosage this time would be
>>>> the same
>>>> as last time and get people in the habit of just clicking past the
>>>> form.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>>>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>>>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>>>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>>>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________________
>>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>
>
>
>
>
> --No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.0.0/1491 -
> Release Date: 9-6-2008 6:52
>
>

9 Jun 2008 - 11:34am
Danny Hope
2008

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 4:37 PM, <jennifer.r.vignone at jpmorgan.com> wrote:
> I think it might be useful to ask the user before modules of content were
> moved, switched, auto-populated, etc. before actually doing so in an
> interface.
> Perhaps a feature where such a thing could be turned on or off, along the
> lines or "Don't show this to me again" or "Remind/Ask me later" adapted to
> suit this need.
> Perhaps also a single click to return to a default view so the user could
> escape the changing environment and revisit missed items.

I think, if you're going to ask the user about their preference, you
may as well just give the user buttons to declare their view.

--

Regards,
Danny Hope
http://hobointernet.com
+44 (0)845 230 3760

9 Jun 2008 - 4:32pm
Jennifer Vignone
2008

No, not necessarily. Why would you state such a thing?
You give the user the option to accept recommended changes to the interface based on their history. This way you could reveal or suggest things that they might not know how those selections worked but you coud present them contextual to a choice of something they used.

Even better might be to suggest something after you had tracked a related item that they showed usage of so that the recommendation was a more solid one.

Back to the Amazon example, don't recommend something to me after I clicked on it once, which could have even been a mistake, or someone could have been browsing while I was logged in and looked at things I don't care about. Recommended after you see that I look at books on lithography frequently, read alot about World War I, and so on. I may not know what's out there -- and therefore wouldn't want to have all of the control to declare a view -- but I would like to be able to turn those suggestions and changes off and on.

They aren't quite the same thing or do not need to be. Do not limit the ideas of what could be. This comes up frequently in application work that I do, and so it could be applicable to any web/form environment.

=================
>I think, if you're going to ask the user about their preference, you
>may as well just give the user buttons to declare their view.
>
>--
>
>Regards,
>Danny Hope

9 Jun 2008 - 7:27pm
Jeremy White
2008

Right, don't hide something just because I haven't used it yet.
Taken to an extreme, you might hide all the options besides "File
Open" because that's the history of what I clicked.

Of course, this program is going to be much more complex.
But let's say it determines that I'm details oriented, maybe
because I click through the help immediately upon coming to the site.
Sometimes I read the help right away, sometimes I feel like being more
adventurous and I try to break a program and find out what's wrong
with it.

My point is, my cognitive style is not set in stone at all times and
trying to determine it after a few clicks is probably going to lead
you to an incorrect analysis, and possibly it's just going to piss
me off. Personally, for a site that tries to read my mind, I'd
rather tell the site my current mood or goal and let it modify things
according that that preference.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=30025

9 Jun 2008 - 8:29pm
Chauncey Wilson
2007

There was a paper at the CHI2008 conference in Florence Italy that
addressed several aspects of adaptive UIs including predictability and
accuracy. The reference is:

Gajos, K. Z., Everitt, K., Tan, D. S., Czerwinski, M., and Weld, D. S.
2008. Predictability and accuracy in adaptive user interfaces. In
Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy, April 05 - 10, 2008).
CHI '08. ACM, New York, NY, 1271-1274.

The article focuses on adaptive toolbars and not on content, but it
does discuss some of the issues around predictability and accuracy of
the adaptive user interface.

Here is a portion of the abstract that summarizes some of the results.

"We present a study that examines the relative effects of
predictability and accuracy on the usability of adaptive UIs.
Our results show that increasing predictability and accuracy
led to strongly improved satisfaction. Increasing accuracy
also resulted in improved performance and higher utilization
of the adaptive interface. Contrary to our expectations,
improvement in accuracy had a stronger effect on performance,
utilization and some satisfaction ratings than the improvement
in predictability."

There was one other paper from Florence that deals with adaptive
interfaces for small screen devices.

Findlater, L. and McGrenere, J. (2008) Impact of Screen Size on
Performance, Awareness, and User Satisfaction With Adaptive Graphical
User Interfaces. Proc. CHI'08, ACM Press.

The ACM Digital Library is filled with research and theorie about
adpative user interfaces.

One of the issues that comes out of the adaptive interface literature
is the amount of data a system gathers before presenting the user with
a change to content or the user interface. Clippy, the infamous style
of user assistance in Windows a decade or more ago, was a system that
was supposed to monitor user input and based on usage patterns (and a
Bayesian algorithm is memory serves me well) present the user with
tips or hints on how to do better. The problem with clippy was that
it's algorithm threshold was not conservative enough -- it should have
waited longer and gathered more data before presenting it's mostly
useless suggestions. There was an article in The Economist that
explained why Clippy was undone by a poorly tuned Bayesian algorithm.

Chauncey

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Jeff Howard <id at howardesign.com> wrote:
> Has anyone actually used this design? My guess is that it's
> impossible to accurately speculate about how good or bad this is
> without trying it and without being tainted by pre-knowledge of its
> adaptive behavior. It all depends on the execution.
>
> There are plenty of poor examples of adaptive UIs, but there are
> great examples too.
>
> Quicksilver is an adaptive example that I love. It's guessing and
> learning all the time. And right out of the box it's more than a
> little dumb. But over time it has learned what I tend to search for
> and serves it up practically the moment my fingers hit the keyboard.
>
> Another example that's closer to the MIT example was the BBC
> redesign described a few years ago.
>
> http://www.liamdelahunty.com/blog/media/theglasswall.pdf
>
> Instead of shifting the location of content, it highlighted
> particular paths through the content, based on past behavior so that
> frequently clicked areas grew more prominent over time. Like a
> well-trampled path across a lawn.
>
> // jeff
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=30025
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

9 Jun 2008 - 9:23pm
Paul Sherman
2006

M2c:

I wouldn't necessarily discourage or disparage this early work.

But until these systems get much "smarter", I'd continue to place my money
on well thought-out designs that incorporate faceted classification, simple
yet robuts search capabilities, and multiple navigation systems within a
clean and well laid out user interface.

These approaches are answering the question "what do different users want
and need?" quite effectively right now.

Paul

--------------------
RE:
Technology Review (MIT's innovation rag) has an article on Adaptive UIs for
the web.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/20872/

What do people think about this? Does it scale?
from an IxD perspective?

13 Jun 2008 - 3:26am
AJ Kock
2007

@ JenniferVignone - Their sales because of the technique would have
told them otherwise if it wasn't working.

@ Danny - We already know users don't know themselves very well. That
is why we don't ask, but observe.

@ Jeff - Dangerous situations I can probably think of is Air Traffic
Controller Interfaces. Adaptive systems could prescribe procedures for
certain situations, but for you to trust it you will need to have
catered for ALL possible situations and that is rarely possible (right
now).

The example they used in the study shows content being presented
differently, but the details of the content stayed the same. So if the
system guessed incorrectly your cognitive style, you would still be
getting the information you expect when you clicked on a link; it
would just be presented differently. For e-commerce purposes they
would probably track their accuracy by improved sales and by comparing
their predicted content between different, but similar cognitive
users.

Regarding the Amazon example: Amazon usually ask you if you are "User
X" and if not, "click here". This will remove details of the previous
user and new predictions will be based on your surfing, You can't
really blame Amazon's predictive system, if you "lied" to them about
who you are, by continue browsing as someone else.

13 Jun 2008 - 8:39am
Jennifer Vignone
2008

Interesting comments.
>>> "Their sales...wasn't working."

I don't think I implied that it didn't work at all. I stated that it
doesn't work for me, and I would figure not to be the only person it
doesn't work for. I suggested that it might be worthwhile to let people
opt-out of that sort of tracking or limit its prevalence on their logged
in view. I like to do the browsing and don't like the "push" unless I am
in the mood for assistance. This goes for in-store and on-line browsing
and purchasing.

As for "lying" to Amazon. Please choose your words with more care. It is
not inconceivable that a user would look up gifts and browse content not
typical to their own pursuits. They should not be penalized by then having
to sort through their own user experience later on with recommendations
for additional blenders, watches, socks, etc., that they may have been
looking at for another reason. Nor should they have to log out to protect
themselves from having those searches retained by Amazon. In the privacy
of my home, I shouldn't have to log out of any environment where the
"one-click" buy experience is promoted as feature.

Let's talk about sites "spying" regardless of whether nor not a user is
logged in.
And I think users know themselves well enough to know if they want to be
"tracked" or not.
And when they do, they turn the option on to have Freddy Amazon follow
them down the street.

It is an experience that could be improved or enhanced, allowing the user
more control.

Generally, this communication is for informational purposes only
and it is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase
or sale of any financial instrument or as an official confirmation
of any transaction. In the event you are receiving the offering
materials attached below related to your interest in hedge funds or
private equity, this communication may be intended as an offer or
solicitation for the purchase or sale of such fund(s). All market
prices, data and other information are not warranted as to
completeness or accuracy and are subject to change without notice.
Any comments or statements made herein do not necessarily reflect
those of JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates.

This transmission may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or
use of the information contained herein (including any reliance
thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any
attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect
that might affect any computer system into which it is received and
opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it
is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan Chase &
Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any loss
or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this
transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and
destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard
copy format. Thank you.
Please refer to http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures for
disclosures relating to UK legal entities.

Syndicate content Get the feed