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

Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 236 posts

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#201

Post by user_7832 »

tankerkiller125 wrote: post #190
shas3 wrote: post #162

In India, Google search for a pretty specific string, " ambulance phone number," showed up a bunch of scammy ads. In our distraught state (an elderly relative had just had a fall), we accidentally called the top ad which turned out to be a scam ambulance service. A beat up van showed up, without any EMT, a sketchy stretcher without straps, and no tracks or fasteners to hold it down inside the van. We were outraged an…

Sounds like India needs a single number for all emergency services instead of the fractured system they have now.

I believe 112 is already the single emergency number. It appears to be a relatively recent thing though.

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#202

Post by MichaelZuo »

_nalply wrote: post #165
MichaelZuo wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To catch all bicycle thieves, everywhere, at all times, would require 24/7 worldwide surveillance of every square meter on Earth. Do you really desire this?

This is an utopia and the definition of utopia is that this is not a problem. This might be because this surveillance is benevolent. Another way could be that everybody has the tools to do this surveillance themselves in a beneficial way for everybody. That's utopia for you (shrugs).

> This is an utopia and the definition of utopia is that this is not a problem.

What?

It's difficult to tell online whether a statement is facetious or not. But I can't see how this makes any sense otherwise.

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#203

Post by x0x0 »

aikinai wrote: post #121
davidkuennen wrote: post #61

It has always boggled my mind that you're even allowed to publish ads targeting other companies brand names as keywords without being the verified owner of that company. But I understand Google here. It's probably their single biggest income stream. Our company is using a very big chunk of our ad words budget targeting our own brand name to make sure it's on top. More than for any other keyword by far. And I imagine…

I disagree that it’s a scam to advertise over someone else’s name as long as it’s clear and you’re not trying to confuse the user. I’ve found better alternatives than what I was looking for through competitor ads. I’ve had this happen on Google and the App Store and I appreciate it. It gives newer, or less well-known, companies a chance to gain exposure. And consumers like me might learn about a superior option they…

> is it really a negative for the industry and consumers if Figma shows ads on searches for Photoshop?

Yes, because Google's intended and actual outcome is companies are blackmailed into paying to compete on advertising for their own names. Which is highly likely a navigation query.

It would be different if someone googled "photoshop alternatives" or sth

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#204

Post by thejohnconway »

justin_oaks wrote: post #177
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a real and thorny problem seems to have a trivial answer.. there's a good chance the trivial answer is incorrect. Two of my favorite H. L. Mencken quotes: "There's always an easy solution to every human problem; Neat, plausible and wrong." "The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake." And this…

Law makers seem to universally ignore the unintended consequences of the laws they propose or endorse. I wish there were a requirement to list all the foreseeable consequences of any law that's proposed, both positive consequences and negative ones.

> I wish there were a requirement to list all the foreseeable consequences of any law that's proposed, both positive consequences and negative ones.

Please enumerate all the positive and negative consequences of your requirement!

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#205

Post by cldellow »

giarc wrote: post #129

The problem is real but this guys response is a bit over the top. In one tweet [1] he claims Google should know which one is the real restaurant. Does he think there is a person at Google reviewing all search results? Does he not understand that it's possible for two restaurants to exist with the same name? Does he not get that there are billions of searches with billions of search permutations done every minute. 1 -…

I get that it's a hard problem.

I don't think this is about "reviewing all search results". This is about reviewing the people who are paying you money to run ads.

In this case, there were likely plenty of signals of fraud. This advertiser was advertising to multiple domains, and each domain was relatively young. Those domains would likely also have had low organic traffic.

Here are some candidate solutions. I haven't thought these through deeply. This is spur-of-the-moment thinking. A multibillion dollar company could hopefully do better than me.

1 - Google could review new paid domains. In this case, the fraudulent site posted contact information, including the phone number for the real business! Phoning that number would have revealed the fraud immediately.

2 - Google could generally validate the identity of its advertisers. Advertising for a business? Cool, let's see some incorporation or tax paperwork.

3 - Google could impose a cost for being fraudulent. Want to run ads? Cool, we'll take a $1,000 retainer for each top-level domain you want to advertise. When you close your account, you can have it back after a 90-day waiting period. If we bounce you for fraud, we'll keep it.

I used to work in ad tech. We reviewed the people we entered into financial relationships with, because we knew their bad behaviour could affect us. Google could do similarly.

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#206

Post by anigbrowl »

perihelions wrote: post #59

Simple legislative fix: entitle the victim (small business) to quickly and easily claim a trademark infringement on an ad, and claw back 100% of Google's revenue on that ad. And let Google be civilly liable, if they choose to contest such a trademark claim and they're in the wrong. Inspired by YouTube's DMCA claim system (or my superficial understanding of it). If there's a "bug bounty" on fraud, there will be an ent…

Simple legislative fix

Unless you have a magic wand, simplicity usually masks conflicting incentives backed by lots of political, financial, and legal capital. It's like looking at a war and saying 'why don't people just stop fighting, because peace would be nicer.'

The social default is to look at problems as examples of individual deviance from a principled ideal. It's more instructive to look at them as examples of resource mobilization in contested/conflicted spaces. The italicized words are terms of art in social science that represent two prominent schools of thought (which are themselves in competition).

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#207

Post by dsr_ »

hunter2_ wrote: post #195
dsr_ wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FTC has jurisdiction here. No new law is required. Complaints need to be made.

I think the "fix" proposed here is that it be as frictionless as sending a DMCA notice. Is what you're talking about that easy? Sounds like we need scammy middleware between regular people and the complaint system to keep complaints flowing, monetize later!

It is easier than sending a DMCA notice.

https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/#/faq

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#208

Post by kevviiinn »

rhino369 wrote: post #200
actionfromafar wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also sounds like Google knows to do the right thing when the country government they operate in force them to.

Maybe. But it's easier to say "dial 911" when a country has 911. If India doesn't have something like 911, what is google supposed to recommend? Call 0118 999 881 999 119 725 3!

I don't know, google maps seems to find the phone numbers for places pretty easily. Why is search any different?

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#209

Post by kube-system »

perihelions wrote: post #59

Simple legislative fix: entitle the victim (small business) to quickly and easily claim a trademark infringement on an ad, and claw back 100% of Google's revenue on that ad. And let Google be civilly liable, if they choose to contest such a trademark claim and they're in the wrong. Inspired by YouTube's DMCA claim system (or my superficial understanding of it). If there's a "bug bounty" on fraud, there will be an ent…

The DMCA shields content providers from copyright liability. What you’re probably thinking of is YouTube’s voluntary ContentID system and related policies that they started doing to make Viacom happy. It doesn’t really have anything to do with the DMCA.

Broadly speaking, when someone infringes trademark, they are entitled to the damages done, which are likely much greater than the ad revenue here.

Re: Google search for a local restaurant returns scammer’s ad as top result

#210

Post by jareklupinski »

a4isms wrote: post #199

Doug @Rushkoff says that the ethic of today's "entrepreneur" is to #GoMeta - don't provide a product or a service, simply find a way to be a predatory squatter on a chokepoint between people who do useful things and people who use those things. — https://twitter.com/doctorow/status/1628948931710451712 ---------- Alice: “Is Cory talking about these predatory fake restaurants? Or Google itself?” Beth: “Yes?”

yup that was my kneejerk too, literally the definition of 'middleman'

the only counter-point I have is when I used to sell demonstration boards: they cost me almost nothing to produce and I designed them in minutes, but people who bought them said I saved them R&D time in the long run (open source)

Post reply on HN