Seems like certain website elements haven't recovered from being hugged to death earlier, but the "x" is there, just not visible. Keep clicking and it will disappear.
My (large media) company has had it as well. We've made inclusion and progression a huge point of emphasis over the last decade though, so it's not really surprising.
One of the appealing aspects of Carmax for investors is that they're the only dealership that makes money both on purchases as well as sales. Their appeal for consumers is that they're friendly and transparent, even if it's not the best deal.
So the takeaway here is that it was dumb because was poorly built?
Also, how different is that "Information" report behind the paywall? It would not surprise me to see Mashable rewriting an article but to do so with paid content seems inappropriate.
The "FOMO" bit is the same kind of thing these finance articles always use: "market moves, and here's why."
For the most part, nobody truly knows exactly why the market moves the way it does from day to day, but these journalists always try to provide a narrative- even if it's not true it's usually not provable.
They are at Starbucks. I really don't know how to interpret these things because they have no details. They don't say which item is known to cause cancer, so I'm standing there adding sweetener and thinking "should I not add sugar? Or cinnamon?". It is doing more harm than good at this point.
The implementation of the ad examples is interesting. I'm not sure wireframes would be the most effective way to gauge annoyance. The times I really curse and want to smash my device is usually less about the design rather than the functionality of what it's keeping me from doing or interfering with. I'd have a much less visceral reaction to the same ad design if I was just looking at a wireframe during a study.
Absolutely garbage article. The main point is Amazon's marketing strategy, which is the same as everyone elses'. Also, the Echo is terrible compared to the others.