No More Deceptive Download Buttons • Hacker News Board

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#211

Post by JacobJans » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 9:41 PM UTC

whyleyc wrote: post #9

This is a joke right ? We run Adsense display ads on our site and have to spend significant time every day reviewing and blocking new ads which try to use these deceptive practices. Since Google clearly has the tech to detect this they should be implementing it at source on the advertisers (malvertisers). Instead they are pushing this down to the publishers and hitting them with penalties. It's a clever ploy in some…

I too have seriously struggled with this. I recently discovered that you can ban this entire category of ads (mostly). Go to "Allow & block ads", then "sensitive categories" and select "Ringtones & Downloadables." This will remove most of these types of ads.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#212

Post by drdeca » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:01 PM UTC

kalkin wrote: post #115

onion2k wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, this will work on ad networks other than Google, so it''s more broad reaching than anything they could do just within AdSense. This is good. Secondly, and arguably more importantly, the way to stop these adverts is for them to cost the advertiser (in either money or time) without giving them the reward of revenue. If the ads stop working then people won't have a reason to make them. By stopping the ads in Ad…

"more broad reaching than anything they could do just within AdSense" ... as long as you don't care about browsers which don't run Google's Safe Browsing service. You know another way to stop these ads? Make available an advertising network which doesn't serve them. Website owners who don't want to install malware on their users' computers - which is probably most of us - would prefer that network to the others. As-i…

In my experience as a consumer, project wonderful ad system thingy ads seem to be unobjectionable.

They are paid per length of time, not by click or view, and they are determined by a continuous auction.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#213

Post by megablast » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:01 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #129

whyleyc wrote: post #9

This is a joke right ? We run Adsense display ads on our site and have to spend significant time every day reviewing and blocking new ads which try to use these deceptive practices. Since Google clearly has the tech to detect this they should be implementing it at source on the advertisers (malvertisers). Instead they are pushing this down to the publishers and hitting them with penalties. It's a clever ploy in some…

Most websites seem not to care about the content they deliver to their visitors. When I visit xyz.com, it is xyz.com's job to ensure that it doesn't deliver to me malicious content. I have zero sympathy for xyz.com telling me that it's not their problem, they serve 3rd party ads and if these ads are malicious it's the fault of these advertisers not their.

Says someone who has never managed webs on a website.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#214

Post by JoshTriplett » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:24 PM UTC

spdustin wrote: post #163

JoshTriplett wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If all your options are terrible, you might as well use the terrible option with the largest ROI, right? One of the options is "stop running ads". Why is a "site for public safety communications" running ads at all? Public safety announcement: block all ads to make your browsing much safer. Use Adblock Plus (with so-called "acceptable ads" turned off) or uBlock Origin.

He's not running a public safety institution, he runs a site that has live audio streams from police / emergency scanners. (incidentally, Lindsay, I've used http://www.radioreference.com to learn a great deal about Software Defined Radio, and I occasionally listen to various Illinois streams on http://www.broadcastify.com - thanks for running these sites!)

> He's not running a public safety institution, he runs a site that has live audio streams from police / emergency scanners.

Thanks for the clarification; that makes more sense.

I'd still echo the comments from elsewhere in the thread about not doing business with a vendor with shady practices just because other vendors do no better.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#215

Post by username223 » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:25 PM UTC

woobar wrote: post #202

0xffff2 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what should Google do then? If a "tiny yellow box" is just noise, isn't a larger yellow box just more noise?

Go back to a different background for ads, for instance.

Or simply put ads only in the right-hand column that is now entirely populated by ads. "Do you want the results our software comes up with? Then read left. Or do you want the results people pay us to show you? Then read right." This would be an honest business model, and if advertisers had to provide more value to searchers than Google's algorithm with their keyword bids, they might actually do something smart and useful.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#216

Post by cloudwalking » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:37 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #210

FenugreekAcerb wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or monetization models that don't rely on spammy, useless ads. I'm struggling to find one, any idea?

Build something so good, people will pay for it? It seems to work for companies like Netflix and Toyota.

But not companies like Google, or Facebook, or Twitter...

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#217

Post by killface » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:45 PM UTC

crdoconnor wrote: post #175

ryanlol wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As with most things in this world, you could sue them.

They'd invoke the first amendment. It would be pretty open and shut.

google is not a government agency. you can't claim first amendment when dealing with private parties. that's like me suing the NFL for not letting me post racist rants on their homepage because of the first amendment.

edit: i dun read gud. leaving comment as an homage to lack of literacy

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#218

Post by rbobby » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 10:47 PM UTC

whyleyc wrote: post #9

This is a joke right ? We run Adsense display ads on our site and have to spend significant time every day reviewing and blocking new ads which try to use these deceptive practices. Since Google clearly has the tech to detect this they should be implementing it at source on the advertisers (malvertisers). Instead they are pushing this down to the publishers and hitting them with penalties. It's a clever ploy in some…

You'd think that Google could use a Bayesian classifier to detect malicious AdSense display ads at setup time. Add an appeal process to take care of ongoing training.

This would negatively affect Google's revenue... which is probably why they haven't done so.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#219

Post by killface » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 11:01 PM UTC

torgoguys wrote: post #97

I'm surprised of the negativity towards this action, but I guess I shouldn't be. A lot of you are in a very different situation than me and this will affect you directly. However, warning people away from being potentially tricked by these deceptive ads is a very good thing. Tons of sites out there that turn a blind eye to such ads and that's bad. Yes, there will be some unfortunate pain for sites that responsibly at…

> I'm surprised of the negativity towards this action

I'm not. This site is filled with grey-hat folks who would do anything to make a buck on the web. I mean, it's a forum hosted by/affiliated with a VC firm, and look at the comments here. A bunch of people angry that google would dare do this, because they might/will be targeted. People were also pissed when Google stopped using meta keywords, and when they stopped reading text that was made invisible in CSS, and really any grey- or black-hat way to get more visitors/ad impressions.

Re: No More Deceptive Download Buttons

#220

Post by gherkin0 » Thu, Feb 04, 2016, 11:04 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #153

alkonaut wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any blockning of "malverts" should arguably just emulate view so it costs the advertiser even more than the lost view. If Google don't want to do that themselves (which would be understandable) they could likely expose it in APIs so plugins like ad blockers can do it.

Google can't do that. It'd be fraud.

I don't think it would be fraud if they did it to ads from non-Google networks. But yeah, they shouldn't fake views on ads that come from their own networks.