I don't think 2013 article is still relevant today.
It's still relevant. I took this screenshot a few seconds ago: https://i.imgur.com/6LoQ3TW.png
[deleted]
Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
91–100 of 109 posts
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#92I'm curious why these ads are even allowed to get through the network in the first place. Is there just NO content reviewing taking place? That's seems negligent on Google's part. There is no reason for an ad like that to exist on any webpage, period. It should have been blocked at the source. Where is the 3-strikes policy in the ad space? Google is so eager to punish its Youtube streamers for running questionably of…
I found this kind of misleading download buttons to be very common for free (no-cost) Windows software, and I also can't understand why Google is unwilling to put a stop to it. I'm pretty sure that this class of advertisement can be quite reliably identified with machine learning techniques, of which Google is so fond.
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#93Everyone seems to give Google the benefit of the doubt here. Is it possible they aren't doing anything because they are making lots of money from this ethical grey area? The incentives seem perfectly aligned... the advertiser doubtlessly doesn't care about whether it's a scrupulous ad or not. Paint.NET authors make money, and Google makes money.
If the toolbars, as is typical, end up hijacking the search engine, or injecting their own ads on pages, then Google loses money.
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
>and for easy mod management you can even install their launcher Does that launcher ask for the username and password? That's a pretty lousy message to be teaching mostly children about password security.
no it does not, it launches the vanilla client in which you enter your username and password so it goes directly to Mojang! the launcher (technically a wrapper around the normal launcher) was recently rebranded to Twitch Launcher since Amazon (Twitch) bought Curse https://mods.curse.com/client
Ah, that's good. Thanks for the correction.
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#95I hope the author of Paint.NET will see this submission and removes the ads. I'm a big fan Paint.NET and made a donation. But this practice is just shady and makes no honor to the author of otherwise great application.
Yes, I'm also very fond of Paint.Net, so it irks me to see this kind of article
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#96I find that article hilarious with this context: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/googl...
Thanks for the link. I wondered what happened to that policy
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#97If it is about the money for Google, can't they at least put a warning over the ad that says "Are you really sure you want to download [Some Malware]?" if you hover/click on the ad.
Nevermind, the right thing to do would be to ban these kinds of ads outright, but we can't count on them to do that now, can we?
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#98Everyone seems to give Google the benefit of the doubt here. Is it possible they aren't doing anything because they are making lots of money from this ethical grey area? The incentives seem perfectly aligned... the advertiser doubtlessly doesn't care about whether it's a scrupulous ad or not. Paint.NET authors make money, and Google makes money.
If the toolbars, as is typical, end up hijacking the search engine, or injecting their own ads on pages, then Google loses money.
And yet this happens. All the time. In adsense, on youtube, on Google+, on the Play store and basically in every other customer-facing Google business. I can see two reasons for that:
1. A not-my-problem mentality at Google
2. Google is trying to replace human intelligence with AI pseudo-intelligence which has turned out to be really really easy to fool
I believe it's actually a combination of the two and it scares the crap out of me thinking these guys want to create self driving (and flying!) cars.
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#99The terrible experience of pulling down an installer for Paint.net was one of the final straws that pushed me to move over to using chocolatey for windows workstation setup. > choco install paint.net Unfortunately, while that allows me to never see fake download-button ads when pulling down software for my machine, one place it's still a nightmare in is the world of getting minecraft mods installed on a kid's compute…
Yep, the only time I've ever managed to install malware was trying to put a very ordinary Minecraft mod on for my kid. How to feel stupid in one easy move.
Don't feel too hard on yourself. While I do not think I've installed malware because of that, I've mostly been lucky I guess (or just haven't noticed the malware yet).
The stars are aligned against you on this:
1) impatient kid who wants his mod working,
2) unfamiliar territory for you,
3) the timing for these things is ALWAYS wrong, you've probably got pressing household matters to attend to or another kid wanting your attention,
4) a couple of more points I forgot.
Re: Google and Paint.NET need to stop misleading users (2013)
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the toolbars, as is typical, end up hijacking the search engine, or injecting their own ads on pages, then Google loses money.
And yet this happens. All the time. In adsense, on youtube, on Google+, on the Play store and basically in every other customer-facing Google business. I can see two reasons for that: 1. A not-my-problem mentality at Google 2. Google is trying to replace human intelligence with AI pseudo-intelligence which has turned out to be really really easy to fool I believe it's actually a combination of the two and it scares t…
I think you should look at point 3., slightly different from 1: everytime Google acts on something like this, they show that they can act.
If the damage it causes them, both in profit and image, is not very large then it might very well not be worth it to risk setting a precedent than Google is responsible for policing their ads. It is exactly the scenario they were caught in with YouTube, and becoming the police there didn't help them at all compared to the previous status quo.
Of course that's the good scenario, the bad one would be that Google, being of a size and importance that can be called a monopoly in the Internet ad space, would be violating these "fraudsters" rights since technically what they do may not be breaking any laws, which would lead to this becoming a precedent and all the others who currently try to keep themselves mostly clean in their ads would be vindicated to go evil too.
I'm not saying these are the real reasons, but again if the damage and risk they represent is insignificantly small relative to the whole, why would Google risk opening that can of worms.