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

How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

xlii.space

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 236 posts

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#211

Post by btilly »

nellophonic wrote: post #47
OptionX wrote: post #10

Google is the worst offender, but a lot of companies are increasingly hiding themselves behind a wall of automated systems to completely neuter users ability to challenge any decision unilaterally taken by the them. The LLM-age has worsen the situation but it started well before it. At some point it may be necessary to add the requirement for large companies to have a both human contact point and perhaps a requiremen…

Funny you should say that. I'm not a big Instagram user, but have had an account for years. The company I work for has just started an Instagram campaign, and asked anyone who wanted to, to check out their campaign and give it a like. I did so, and a minute later received this email: "Your Instagram account has been suspended. This is because your account, or activity on it, doesn't follow our Community Standards on…

My wife lost her Facebook account because Facebook autolinked it to someone else's Instagram (not hers), then shut that one down for abuse.

No appeal process.

Luckily she didn't use Facebook much.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#212

Post by gowld »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #175
spwa4 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't making street plans from satellite pictures ruled transformative? So if you get an AI to make street plans from Google maps, satellite layer, you're not violating copyright are you?

I would worry about trap streets. A collection of facts isn't copyrightable, and arguably the network of existing streets shown in satellite photos falls into that category. But if I were the photo licensor, I'd be tempted to Photoshop in a few fictional features that could be protected as "creative expression," or some such BS.

Trap steets (fake data with no creative expression) are not copyrightable un USA, but specific art for drawing maps is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#213

Post by Henchman21 »

WarmWash wrote: post #75
Toutouxc wrote: post #25

That’s surprising, because in my opinion Google doesn’t care about malicious anything. The other day I had to look for something on YouTube on my dad’s computer with a disabled ad-blocker. I saw like 30 ads in 15 minutes, every single one of them was a scam, literally not a single non-fraudulent ad. Google is full cartoon villain evil at this point.

The more you ad-block and tracker block, the more scammy the ads when you take down the guards. People who never do any sort of blocking are the most valuable ad-targets, and hence get the highest bids when their views are auctioned. They get Toyota, Coke, and Downy ads. Scam advertisers are bottom feeders and the "advertiser of last resort". Google doesn't really care that much about people with blank profiles, and…

> these people use their services and contribute nothing back

Each and every single human on the planet has made a contribution to Google in the form of their data — whether they wanted to or not! What more must we give for the great and all-knowing Google to contribute ANYTHING back to the commons? Remember when CAPTCHA was meant to crowd source the deciphering of old books for the good of all?

Remember “Do no evil”?

I mean for fucks sake are you a Google agent? Or even a human?

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#214

Post by AuthAuth »

drdexebtjl wrote: post #203
ButlerianJihad wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you realize that there are legitimate third-party services which assist with passport applications and filing paperwork, generally in the capacity as a courier. Similarly, in my state and others, there are third-party services which operate as storefronts in under-served communities, that provide services as the DMV office would. So it is unclear how you determine that they are definitely scams, unless you hav…

The underlying government services are hard to access _because_ middlemen stand to profit from providing assistance.

Do you really think that middle man services have enough leverage to convince the government to degrade their services? That is hard to believe. Its more likely that the government process just sucks and these services sprung up to fill a need. At some point it will be improved and these services will disappear.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#215

Post by Henchman21 »

pessimizer wrote: post #167
hermitcrab wrote: post #152

We are entering a Kafkaesque world where all powerful companies are the gatekeepers, but there is no chance to talk to a human to appeal their decisions. Your only hope is if a) you have an inside contact or b) you can create enough stink on social media.

We reached that years ago. We're entering a world in which there is no chance to talk to a human to appeal their decisions, and if you complain about it your social media account will be suspended, you will be questioned by police, and your child will be expelled from their private school.

If we’re already in that world, datacenters are a valid target for destruction.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#216

Post by cindyllm »

Henchman21 wrote: post #215
pessimizer wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We reached that years ago. We're entering a world in which there is no chance to talk to a human to appeal their decisions, and if you complain about it your social media account will be suspended, you will be questioned by police, and your child will be expelled from their private school.

If we’re already in that world, datacenters are a valid target for destruction.

[dead]

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#218

Post by bartread »

ryandrake wrote: post #122
usernametaken29 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a strategy. Ask RyanAir. They systematically shut down any way to communicate with them, except lawsuits. Tried their chatbot, hotline, email, letter, fax, small claims court (I’m not joking they don’t even care about that). Unless you turn up with a court order and confiscate a plane, they simply won’t give a fuck, and I’m sure it’s a tactic to deter 99% of their problems before they start

These companies have correctly figured out that customers will still give them money, even if they provide no customer support, are actively hostile to their customers, and only respond to lawsuits. Such a weird timeline we are on! People willingly do business with companies who are actively against them.

> People willingly do business with companies who are actively against them.

Sometimes it's because they don't have a choice.

Case in point, since we're already talking about them: Ryanair. I'd cheerfully never fly with them again after, several years ago, they denied my wife and I boarding to a plane despite the fact the screens round about were still saying final call. Not just us either: about half a dozen other people missed that flight because the screens in the main terminal only updated with the departure gate a few minutes before final call and we happened to be quite a long way away when that happened. I've never had anything like it happen at any airport before or since.

Be that as it may: we can't practically avoid using Ryanair. My wife is from another country and Ryanair is one of only two airlines that fly there from the UK at all and the only airline that flies there from the nearest international airport (roughly half an hour away as opposed to 2+ hours away).

So we fly Ryanair even though neither of us want to: there simply isn't another practical or sensible choice.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#220

Post by ocdtrekkie »

bogwog wrote: post #106
WarmWash wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more you ad-block and tracker block, the more scammy the ads when you take down the guards. People who never do any sort of blocking are the most valuable ad-targets, and hence get the highest bids when their views are auctioned. They get Toyota, Coke, and Downy ads. Scam advertisers are bottom feeders and the "advertiser of last resort". Google doesn't really care that much about people with blank profiles, and…

> doesn't make business sense to put a lot of resources into cleaning up ads that pay google nothing If we lived in a sane world, Google would be held accountable for every scam they advertise. It doesn't matter if you think someone deserved to get scammed for using an ad blocker, because they never would have been scammed if Google didn't choose to put them in danger for the sake of profit. "But they can't possibly…

Yep, if Google lost money/owed damages every time someone got a fraudulent Google ad, you better believe those ads would be squeaky clean.

Sergey's flotilla needs a new vessel this year though, so can't do that.

Post reply on HN