Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

adnauseam.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 344 posts

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#61

Post by waxim »

Spoom wrote: post #29

At the risk of downvotes: Is anyone really surprised? AdNauseam is silently clicking ads. This directly costs Google money . Google happens to control the extension web store for their own browser. Removing it from the store really isn't that bad. Uninstalling it from existing browsers as malware? A little more malicious, but I would still consider it self defense. There is even a method to install it directly[1] whi…

Google HAS to block this and prevent it from ever being run if it can, its click fraud plain and simple and they've been stung too many times with huge bills for fraud it could have prevented and didn't.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#62

Post by downandout »

siegecraft wrote: post #58
downandout wrote: post #48

It's pretty simple: this has to be wreaking havoc with Adsense - depleting ad budgets, artificially inflating CTRs, and giving website owners revenue they didn't earn. This extension also exposes website owners to unfair Adsense bans for generating high numbers of invalid clicks, which can cost them two months of revenue that is almost always withheld when Google bans a site. So by using this you could be costing som…

Were there really enough people using this to cause such an impact?

I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't want to be a favorite site of even one AdNauseum user. Adsense is very sensitive to stuff like this, especially in higher CPC niches.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#63

Post by kome »

m-p-3 wrote: post #51
Spoom wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AdNauseam silently clicks the ads as you mention, so they're actively messing with Google's ad statistics. If I was Google, I would consider it an attack too.

Yup, basically an distributed attack on their ad networks. Hopefully they'll also release a Mozilla Firefox add-on.

They have it: https://adnauseam.io/

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#65

Post by xigency »

Spoom wrote: post #22
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #19

I find it interesting that this particular Adblocker is being removed, while countless others remain. I suspect that other adblockers like, say, ABP or UBO, are less damaging to the agent fingerprint than an adblocker that clicks everything.

AdNauseam silently clicks the ads as you mention, so they're actively messing with Google's ad statistics. If I was Google, I would consider it an attack too.

Then why doesn't Google find some terms or change their terms or policy that clearly indicates why they are taking down the extension? It doesn't make sense to mislead the extension developers by giving them a nonsense reason for taking it down. Obviously, they believe the extension is destructive. So, they should use that as their rationale in taking it down.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#66

Post by nimbix »

GlickWick wrote: post #52
square90 wrote: post #44

The Firefox extension review turned this up: "If you have a YouTube channel (s) and your logged in to that channel it will get your channel suspended for Violation of TOU #4 Section H" [1] Has anyone else confirmed this behavior on YouTube? 1. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/rev...

Of course this could happen. This plugin automates clicking ads on a page, which does directly violate exactly what that section of the TOU is saying.

The users of this extension have a clear case of the "I'm allowed to poke the dog with a stick, but the dog is not allowed to bite me" mentality, so it's a complete surprise to them when it happens.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#67

Post by cuu508 »

Spoom wrote: post #29

At the risk of downvotes: Is anyone really surprised? AdNauseam is silently clicking ads. This directly costs Google money . Google happens to control the extension web store for their own browser. Removing it from the store really isn't that bad. Uninstalling it from existing browsers as malware? A little more malicious, but I would still consider it self defense. There is even a method to install it directly[1] whi…

> This directly costs Google money.

Instead of playing dirty they could accept the challenge and tweak their click-fraud algorithms.

Reminds me of the joke about Jesus and Moses playing golf.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#68

Post by snowwolf »

If the only reason Google have banned this from the Web Store is because it violates the Single Purpose Policy (https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose) - i.e. Blocking AND Clicking Ads, then an interesting test would be to split the extension in 2 - One extension to block all ads on the page, and one extension to click all ads on the page. And then see if they are then both accepted into the store. And as this is a fork of uBlock, you don't really need the first extension - Why don't they just develop an extension whose single purpose is to click all ads on a page and recommend users also install uBlock?

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#70

Post by ChristianBundy »

_ofdw wrote: post #53
blauditore wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it a bit harsh to be so hostile towards online ads. After all, it's has been a significant source of income for innovative companies or services that couldn't exist otherwise, because users are notoriously reluctant to pay for virtual goods. Yes, tracking and overly intrusive fullpage popups are real issues, but not all ads are inherently evil.

I can't name a single online service that is supported by ads and that I couldn't live without. >not all ads are inherently evil. All advertising is manipulation. Advertisers are bad and should feel bad.

Serious question, but how do you feel about persuasion? Is all persuasion inherently manipulative, or are there some types of persuasion/marketing that don't cross the line and become "manipulation"?
Post reply on HN