Google Ad Disguising Itself as www.gimp.org

Post by ocdtrekkie » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #116

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.

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

Post by yjftsjthsd-h » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 11:00 PM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #118

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.

Post by yazzku » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 11:05 PM UTC

kevincox wrote: post #23

indymike wrote: post #12

Not to defend Google but this has been against Ad Words terms for as long as I can remember. It’s surprising they found a way to evade auto detection for this.

> against Ad Words terms Oh great, they'll get their account closed and need to make another one to continue scamming people. How about Google fixes this by displaying the URL that the ad actually goes to? Of course they don't want to do this because the URL with all of the tracking parameters looks ugly and it would hurt conversion rates. $$$ > user safety.

Post by Kiro » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 11:08 PM UTC

agluszak wrote: post #80

matheusmoreira wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why is this getting downvoted?

Post by missedthecue » Sat, Oct 29, 2022, 11:22 PM UTC

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #153

missedthecue wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It empirically is allowed, though. Google is welcome to claim that it's against their rules, but they still let it through.