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

How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

knife-depot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 341 posts

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#71

Post by dhimes »

josefresco wrote: post #53
GFischer wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google ads in the health sector is tough, we tried advertising a medication/pill management software (for keeping track of times, stock, etc. with a twist), and Google was extremely frustrating in randomly restricting our keywords, and we had to repeatedly assert that we were NOT advertising medications. They did not ban our account or anything, they were happy to take a few of our dollars :) (we didn't get to the MV…

Yeah I lost count on how many times I had to tell Google my client was not a pharmacy and not offering any prescription medications (even though we were bidding on terms that related to that market segment). I understand (and can tolerate) false positives in regards to software but there was no excuse for the uneven application by human editors of the guidelines.

I had the same problem in education, actually. I sell tutorial software, and they were flagging me for being an essay farm. And real essay farms were passing through!

After years of flagging, checking, and verifying ok, they still flagged every single ad. I tried get them to move towards a 'trust me, spot check, and ban me forever if you catch me cheating' model (hell, my grocery store does this for me- I can carry a scanner and ring up my own items). But they wouldn't do it.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#72

Post by dhimes »

pud wrote: post #36

Whenever I ban a user from one of my sites for an infraction, he invariably points to several other infracting users and says "well why do they get to post porn (or ads for weapons or whatever) and I don't?" The reason is because I didn't catch the other users. Or their infraction isn't as bad. While I feel bad for the knife company, I also know dealing with user-generated content (like these ads) is hard.

It is hard to do it right. But that's the problem- they don't do it right. Doing it wrong is unacceptable.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#73

Post by paborden »

kkowalczyk wrote: post #66
josefresco wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The reason is because I didn't catch the other users. Or their infraction isn't as bad." That's your reason, not Google's. Google knows full well who is bidding on what keyword. Are you suggesting they are under-staffed, under budgeted or overwhelmed in their task of keeping AdWords clean? I'm not buying it. Google has the resources to evenly apply guidelines, they're not a one-man show who's too busy to squash out…

The famous last words. Of course they are overwhelmed by the taks of keeping AdWords clean, just like Apple is overwhelmed by the task of timely approving apps for App Store, despite having more money than god and the number of AdWord ads submitted to Google is several orders of magnitude greater than number of Apps submitted to Apple. Processes that involve humans are inherently non-scalable and determining whether…

Reminds me of the time an Apple staffer called me to discuss an app I had submitted.

"We'd rather discuss this on the phone," he said.

"What's up?"

"We can approve your app, but can you please remove all references to midgets touching themselves, first?"

Would've paid to have seen that in writing.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#75

Post by dhimes »

samd wrote: post #68

What's really important is this line: "For that reason, we wanted to let you guys, loyal Cutting Edge readers and Knife Depot fans, know that you might not being seeing Knife Depot ads peppered across the Internet. " If you don't get to advertise with Google you basically don't get to advertise on the Internet. That's a powerful monopoly, one they've had for years, and that's the real story here. You have to deal wit…

Indeed- and now they are building internet infrastructure, cars, and eyeware.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#77

Post by rdl »

hfsktr wrote: post #54
Spooky23 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that firearms are heavily regulated by localities in different ways. For example, transport over state lines may require coordination with the shipper. For Amazon, having attorneys stay up to date on the law in multiple jurisdictions doesn't fit with their operating model. Knives are less difficult regulatory-wise, and where there are local legal issues, they usually aren't serious felonies.

I used to work at a shop that sold firearms (among many other things) online. I didn't see all the laws we had to follow but quite a few I noticed (I worked on the intranet site). Unless the customer was coming to pick up the weapon themselves (at our location) we would only ship guns to FFL's[1]. The FFL was also the one who did the background check as far as I'm aware. I don't know what percentage of our sales were…

Yeah, compliance is tricky. You can ship (e.g. a repair, or mailing a firearm to yourself if you don't take luggage on a flight), but it's a huge amount of complexity. Initial sale must be in-person or ship to an FFL or a few exemptions (C&R, CMP, pre-1898, 80%), and of course all the non-firearms parts which Amazon usually does sell. Ammunition is more tightly regulated than e.g. barrels.

Once you add in state laws (e.g. Californians can't buy rifles in Nevada in person, although Nevadans and most other state residents can), and the penalties for non-compliance, and I don't think it's reasonable to require Amazon deal with firearms.

Through Marketplace it might be a little bit more vague. But a pure advertising site should be comfortable running firearms ads. If the owner is personally opposed to firearms, no one is forcing him to carry those ads, but I'm a (very small) part owner of Google, so for a public company, it's probably not a great position to take.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#78

Post by readme »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #16

You cannot wield the kind of economic power Google does and not be evil, at least for the working definition many people have of "evil". We've put a huge hunk of our intellectual and economic capital under the control of a marketing company. I really, really like Google, but I don't see this situation as being stable over a period of decades. Maybe 5-10 more years or so, but not a lot longer. These kinds of decisions…

Evil is a totally relative term. Google probably thinks they are being benevolent by taking an anti-weapons stance.

I'd be inclined to disagree...

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#79

Post by torya »

of all people google is too cheap to have a real live person on the phone doing customer service and because of that you have to email them and wait. you would think a multibillion dollar company can afford to hire some callers, but no, they are too stingy. it is a good strategy if you own google stock though, don't ever expect any service from google though.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#80

Post by dougk16 »

nearengine wrote: post #64
jetti wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, switchblades are legal in some states in the US ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchblade#United_States ). I can see some logic behind making switchblades illegal. They are easy to conceal both pre and post crime, as well as being low cost. Add to that there is no paperwork (that I'm aware of) to purchase one and you have a virtually untraceable weapon. That is hard to say about assault rifles.

So is a regular (or assisted) folding knife like the ones Knife Depot sells, and they are just as fast to open with a little practice. Where do we draw the line between "convenient" and "illegal"? I don't want to see a UK-style ban on pointy objects here in the states.

"they are just as fast to open with a little practice"

Agreed. I think the banning of switchblades just pushed knife manufacturers to innovate, creating opening mechanisms which are just as fast, with fewer moving parts, and are actually easier on the knife[1]. So they follow the letter of the law, but still violate its spirit. Not sure what that spirit is exactly though.

[1] In my experience, switchblades and some auto-openers open so forcefully that over time their locking mechanisms degrade.

Post reply on HN