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

Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 230 posts

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#111

Post by ptato »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #66
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as you realize how much of Google's bottom line is scam and malware distribution, it becomes really hard to view the company as anything but crooks. Google's other big line of business is shaking down businesses for cash by selling the top result for someone's own brand name unless they're paid for protection.

Even if ads were 100% legit verified links, they would still be scams. Advertising is inherently untrustworthy. Why do people trust anything a corporation says about their own products? In the best case scenario, they're highlighting the pros and omitting the cons. Usually they're just straight up lying. I want real opinions written by real people with no conflict of interest. People who are't getting paid by the cor…

Advertising is not meant to be educational, it's meant to make you aware the product exists. Of course you're don't have to trust what the company is saying, but now you know their product exists and what it does. If it was something you were looking for, you can now research it and ask for opinion.

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#112

Post by nyanpasu64 »

> Most marketing urls have those long ugly urls to tell the advertiser what campaign/source etc you clicked on. So Google let's the advertiser display a fake url for ads.

I expected Google Search ads to be above this. But in retrospect I shouldn't be surprised that ads would lie to you.

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#113

Post by MereInterest »

j16sdiz wrote: post #107
dist1ll wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> obeying the law would not scale I don't know why, but that sentence terrifies me. It's like the silicon valley version of a dystopia.

> I don't know why, but that sentence terrifies me. It's like the silicon valley version of a dystopia. because it is true. We have seen the same pattern in copyright infringement handling, spam or fake news control, user support...

It may be true, but why a judge or jury would accept it as justification is beyond me. "My business model requires me to break the law." is a condemnation of the business model, not a justification.

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#115

Post by tantalor »

thethethethe wrote: post #9
tantalor wrote: post #3

Happens for me. Ad says "gimp.org" but links to "gimp.monster". Reported.

I just tried it and now it is 'gilimp.org' The site looks legit

What do you mean it looks legit?

You think "gilimp.org" is legit website for gimp??

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#116

Post by missedthecue »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #61
matheusmoreira wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out uBlock Origin is the best anti-malware software there is. For some reason friends and family just don't seem to get malware anymore after I installed it on their browsers.

As soon as you realize how much of Google's bottom line is scam and malware distribution, it becomes really hard to view the company as anything but crooks. Google's other big line of business is shaking down businesses for cash by selling the top result for someone's own brand name unless they're paid for protection.

I would bet real money that a negligible amount of Google's bottom line is scam and malware distribution.

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#118

Post by missedthecue »

oliwarner wrote: post #79

Why is this allowed? I know Google will do anything for money, but why is Google allowed to signpost a link to gimp.org which actually takes you to g--imp.org (sanitised)? I mean, if nothing else, how do they not share the liability for damages done by the spyware they're literally promoting? For the businesses squatting on the names of more notable ones? AdWords goes too far.

It's not allowed. It'a a violation of Google advertiser policies.

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#119

Post by asddubs »

a1371 wrote: post #104

I think people are missing the actual issue here. Google used to have a clear distinction between what's an ad and what is organic. In these screenshots you have to pay good attention to see the top result is an ad. To keep their conversion numbers up they had to constantly reduce the difference between the ads and everything else. The fact that they can do this and we are so used to it that we don't first identify t…

they used to have a yellow background, then a blue button with a white "advertisement" text in it, and it just got more and more subtle over the years. Now it's two characters of text

Re: Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

#120

Post by somat »

dist1ll wrote: post #74
hedora wrote: post #64

In this particular case, I suspect a trademark complaint against Google would make sense. Google misrepresented the ad as the product of the Gimp project, and were paid as a result. They usually use an "obeying the law would not scale" type argument in court, but that would clearly be bullshit in this case. They have a business relationship with the ad buyer, and should have verified their affiliation with gimp.org.…

> obeying the law would not scale I don't know why, but that sentence terrifies me. It's like the silicon valley version of a dystopia.

It is the reason for the existence of the dmca.

Now I take a rather dim view of the dmca. But the general concept is to move enforcement of the law out of the normal slow bureaucratic channels. Now enforcement is handled directly by the injured party. Much more efficient.

If you immediately see how ripe for abuse this system is. congratulations. you are now more far sighted than the originators of this system.

Now to it's credit, the dmca limits the enforcement(I think, I have never read the law) to a formalized version of "if you stop doing it we won't press charges" however this is still widely abused.

Post reply on HN