this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
123 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

42781 readers
567 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So you thought you’d just read that webpage and then go back to the previous page? A bold assumption. All too often, clicking the back button in your browser doesn’t actually take you back. It’s called back button hijacking, and Google has thus far tolerated it. That ends in June, when the company will designate it a “malicious practice,” and any site continuing to do it will face consequences.

Back button hijacking is a way of wringing more pageviews out of visitors. It’s common on sites that live and die on search traffic. You may end up on a page because it looks like something you want, but instead of letting you leave the domain, it manipulates your page history to insert something else when you click back.

The phantom page is usually a collection of additional content suggestions or a pop-up that tries to eke out a few more clicks from each visitor. Some sites get a little more creative with it, though. For example, LinkedIn has a nasty habit of sending you “back” to the social feed after you land on a link to a profile or job posting.

Google says the back button should always do what you expect it to do—go back. Anything else amounts to a deceptive user experience that can discourage users from visiting unfamiliar pages in the future.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 70 points 1 week ago
[–] cybernihongo@reddthat.com 28 points 1 week ago
[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Punish them how ? Stealing even more that website's content for their LLM ?

Google as a web search tool hasn't been relevant for that kind of threat for a few years now.

[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, it's still the most popular search engine by a long margin.

83% of the searches that happen on PC are done with google and 95% of the searches done on mobile are done with google.

[–] skarn@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

83% of the searches that happen on PC are done with google and 95% of the searches done on mobile are done with google.

So 12% of users didn't change the default from Edge with Bing?

[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Almost, Bing is 10,5% on PC and 0,72% on mobile. So yeah there's a considerable number of people not changing the default on PC.

https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share/desktop/worldwide

[–] Sina@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago

I'd imagine instead of loading the website chrome will give you an at your own risk malicious website warning.

[–] mr_anny@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

Now do the same for redirecting pages in search results, such as Microslop.

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe they should just stop supporting history rewriting in the JavaScript engine?

[–] unique_hemp@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That would break history in all SPAs.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 week ago

SPAs were a mistake.

[–] recentSlinky@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

My first thought was it's an evil act by google and I'm very happy to be wrong for once

[–] It_is_gaslighting@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I never ever experienced this. Can someone give me an example (url) so i can check if it would work on my browsers?

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, you want to be using Firefox in the first place. Chrome is just data-collection. You want uBO and NoScript and learn to check everything when a page fails to load.

[–] It_is_gaslighting@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thanks for the info but, no offence, this was not my question. I never noticed once that 'going back' would bring me to the same or a new one. I use Vanadium on the phone and for browsing on desktop Firefox and Mulvad.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago

No offence taken. Even on Firefox this seems to be a regular issue on sites like hotel/travel booking. When you don't buy anything, the back button sends you to a landing page with more options instead of operating as designed. Weird as it is, Google's move might make life better for Firefox users. I've been conditioned to open everything in a new tab because of such shenanigans.

[–] LoonyLenny@lemdro.id 2 points 1 week ago

Take me back, carry me back
Down to Gasoline Alley where I started from