Live data from Hacker News

Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

techdirt.com

41–50 of 158 posts

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems one could even argue that Google's focus on algorithmic rather than human solutions is a kind of harmful ideology It's the kind of ideology that you often find in people who think they are smarter than everyone else.

As someone who is in a similar domain / company, no one knows how to do this at planet scale unless you narrow it down to a very short list (which is typically very large sums of money). My back of napkin math from another comment: I work in a similar space and it is significantly complex and expensive to do this. Back of the napkin math - * Lets say on average customers contact Google support once a year for each pr…

I believe your guess for frequency is off by a lot, my guess would be more in the vicinity of a tenth of those assumption.

However, more importantly: going in with a "we need to support this" mindset alters incentives. Suddenly, useless error messages and lacking documentation aren't okay any more.

A different approach to solve the issue, if it even exists at that scale: make them pay for it. If you want service, pay $10. That's more than enough cover Google's cost and it's cheap for anyone that really requires service because e.g. their account has been locked, or Google's systems have disabled ads on their site. At the same time, it's expensive enough that you don't get flooded with "why do you show me those videos on the front page?" requests.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#42
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems one could even argue that Google's focus on algorithmic rather than human solutions is a kind of harmful ideology It's the kind of ideology that you often find in people who think they are smarter than everyone else.

Imagine being plucked from college at 22 and getting payed 200k+ total compensation with an introduction telling you how you're now one of the best at your field working with the smartest people in the world... how you're changing the world before you've even been on-boarded.

It's like being told you are heir to the throne, and many engineers carry that same princely arrogance obliviously. At least doctors and lawyers have gone through a second gauntlet after acing school to temper this somewhat. Those fields might not even start making good money until you are years above the entry level, even with a pricey professional degree.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#43
post #19

I don't know if this is the case with techdirt, but by far the most common reason why sites and domains (for mail) end up getting flagged is because their resources have been hijacked by organized criminals and are being used for crime, unbeknownst to the people who own the domains. So if this ever happens to you your first instinct should be to question your own production security situation, not to assume that Goog…

We had some abuse on our site that Google blocked us for - people were trying to run a scam through it. Except the scam was being propagated on youtube and Google did nothing about the videos despite multiple reports from us.

So my attitude is pretty simple: Google can fuck off. They can't even fix their own properties and will ban you for their inability to do so.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#44
post #4

It's refreshing to see an assumption of incompetence rather than malice, since I seem to have come across the idea that Google is questionably motivated by ideology rather a lot recently. One thing I don't understand is why Google continues to try to use algorithmic solutions for content moderation. Surely the frequent false positives ends up hurting potential revenue? And would it not be able to hire people to at le…

It's a hard problem, because the alternative to algorithmic solutions is human solutions, which people are quite unhappy with as well. Facebook for example has gotten a ton of negative press over the years for their human content moderators.

In this space, it doesn't matter how many times you get it right, just how many times you got it wrong.

Also, it was probably a bad idea for Google and Facebook to be so cavalier while they destroyed print advertising (i.e. the press).

Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel, as they say.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#45
post #4

It's refreshing to see an assumption of incompetence rather than malice, since I seem to have come across the idea that Google is questionably motivated by ideology rather a lot recently. One thing I don't understand is why Google continues to try to use algorithmic solutions for content moderation. Surely the frequent false positives ends up hurting potential revenue? And would it not be able to hire people to at le…

It's a hard problem, because the alternative to algorithmic solutions is human solutions, which people are quite unhappy with as well. Facebook for example has gotten a ton of negative press over the years for their human content moderators.

The problem with facebook isn't that they use humans, it's that they treat them very poorly. Treat people with dignity and respect, and the good press will follow.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#46
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there something ideological about phishing protections?

Oh I missed that the first time around. That changes things. Especially given that phishing claims started same time as everything else. Sounds like someone is mass-report attacking them or something then.

Or there were two models, the output of one which is an input to another.

Normally this would be a bad idea, but lots of people do it.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#47
post #29

I think the more correct answer to "Why Are Currently No Ads on Techdirt?" is "Because we put all of our eggs in one basket." Don't build a single point of failure into your revenue stream. There are plenty of alternatives to Google that they should have been using in a smaller way that they could then move into prime position. That way, Techdirt's revenue might have been diminished, but not eliminated.

There are plenty of alternatives to Adsense but none of them are comparable. They all take a huge dive in RPM, are iffy with UX and security and tend to not last long. My personal account was locked out of Adsense in the same way years back. A violation every 5 months or so, which I always "corrected." Then one day it's just off. I respond and eventually Adsense is restored. Then a few weeks later, closed and banned.…

> There are plenty of alternatives to Adsense but none of them are comparable.

There are two companies that could have helped minimize Adsense's monopoly but decided not to: Microsoft and Facebook.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#48
post #4

It's refreshing to see an assumption of incompetence rather than malice, since I seem to have come across the idea that Google is questionably motivated by ideology rather a lot recently. One thing I don't understand is why Google continues to try to use algorithmic solutions for content moderation. Surely the frequent false positives ends up hurting potential revenue? And would it not be able to hire people to at le…

Because Google has a skin in the game. It is a de-facto monopolist in the online advertisement business, and online search. And it's only the political goodwill that keeps it safe from antitrust scrutiny. So, it's a kinda wink-wink nudge-nudge pact, that Google politically aligns with the Democrats, and the Democrats turn a blind eye on Google's monopolistic state. There are plenty of examples, just try searching "Ne…

Critical vs approving articles is a very weak proxy for antitrust. In this case most of them come from the same source (a conservative media company). It seems to me Google is better about removing useless results, or that which are regurgitated (copied) content, than DDG.

I'm not saying Google at this point doesn't have a monopoly. I am saying that the comment above reads more like a conspiracy theory than truth. Doubly so when you read the sources listed as they're all regurgitating the conspiracy-fodder into one another.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#49
A few months ago, I tried experimenting with Google ads to drive some traffic to a side project of mine which was basically a chess-over-videochat website. A little more than 40 impressions later, it was taken down for being "in violation of our Google ad policies". There was never any indication what the violation actually was. I replied and asked several times hoping to get a human to tell me what I had actually done wrong. Instead, they kept sending me an automated email that said, "After reviewing your case and taking your feedback into consideration, we've confirmed that your account was and still is in violation of our Google Ads policies."

They also made it seem like I was some cyber criminal by suggesting that if I tried to create another account, they would automatically take that down too.

This is what a monopoly looks like.

Re: Why are currently no ads on Techdirt? apparently Google thinks we're dangerous

#50

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. At least Microsoft had better customer support than Google.

That's because Microsoft has actual customers. Seriously it's functionally more of a protection racket than any other type of business.
Post reply on HN