cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/50434194
Proton VPN’s pricing page exposed an ab-test identifier linked to two VPN Plus prices: €2.99/month (70% off) and €3.49/month (65% off). Repeated testing produced B → A → B → A → B, with the variant matching the rendered price each time. €12 difference over 24 months.
This article could have been several times shorter.
Probably AI generated
Put a Tl;dr at the top for me, and you can be as autistically thorough as you want to be.
I agree except you can’t have something be “several times shorter”. Yes, I know what you mean, but “several times” can only be longer. It’s like saying “500% less”. You can’t do that. The best case scenario is that means “20% of the original” but arguably “500% less” would mean you take five times the original amount and subtract it from the original, leaving you with negative 4 times the amount, not twenty percent.
Anyway. This is just a light-hearted pedantic pseudo-rant, although I also do stand by the truth of what I’m saying. But I’m not intending corrections, just being silly about a pet peeve of mine. heh
hmm… that article might be better off being -4 times its original length, come to that. heh
I disagree. Twice as short would be half the length if you asked me (same as twice as long, in a glass half empty, half full situation).
In a similar but different example, if you have a 1000 word essay and you cut it to 500 words, you could make it twice as short again by cutting it to 250 words.
That’s because you wrote something different than the other comment.
Twice as short != twice shorter
And the second version is just wrong.
Language is generally workable if it communicates the intended message. In that sense, I acknowledge that it is generally understood what something means, but not always.
However, it is semantic gibberish, and fuck anyone who supports that gibberish.
But yes, it’s fine enough in the same way that when someone says “could of” we know they meant “could’ve” or “could have”. It doesn’t make it correct. And it is still grating.
Two asshats disagreed with my comment above enough to downvote. This is also grating because it means they actively support WRONG. And it is WRONG.
It’s fine, but it is irritating when people are willfully ignorant.
I was posting about these kind proton pricing shenanigans months ago and no one was listening.
I’ve always said Proton feels like they just can’t wait to be Google. I don’t trust them at all.
I have cookies blocked, and have uBlock Origin on, there are no prices at all when I go to the Proton page. What a sketchy company.
Way back when, the observed ABAB sequence could be explained by one server using outdated data and another having the new data and visitors being round-robined to each in turn. I have investigated issues like this and this has happened. Not sure how many companies still use a setup like this, though. It’s been K8s clusters everywhere I’ve worked for many years now. This does indeed look like a proper AB test, the HTML already looks pretty clear.
Yeah and what’s worse is Proton denying AB testing and instead claiming that it was a promo pricing
Never put my trust in proton, remember, they aren’t non-profit at the core!
Yet again Lemmy shows that much of the userbase is young and has little general knowledge. A/B testing is quite standard, and there is nothing shady about testing different prices to see what consumers will purchase more.
A couple of times I’ve been walking in a mall (dating this anecdote back a couple of decades or so. heh) and got asked to participate in product testing where I was shown - in the case I remember better - two cans of soda with different designs. Strawberry soda - one pink can, one red can - which one I was more likely to purchase.
A/B testing is quite common as companies figure out how to sell you more. Assuming it’s randomized, it’s completely ethical.
Is this article AI generated? It seems to wander and repeat itself instead of being well-structured like a standard three-part article (background, analysis, conclusion).
Whether the poor quality was a result of humans or machines, it still leaves me wondering “who cares, why does this matter?” A/B testing, including on pricing, is a standard practice. (But usually you keep it consistent per person instead of switching back and forth. If a refresh gets them a cheaper price, they’ll do it and spoil your data.)
