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

161–170 of 341 posts

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#161

Post by mogrim »

bambax wrote: post #129
smusumeche wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the OP, but I do work for Knife Depot. Google did not ask us to stop advertising for one category of product. They asked us to remove those products from our site, and if we didn't, we could not advertise for ANYTHING via AdWords, including kitchen knives, cutting boards, pocket knives, etc.

Wow. Thanks for the clarification -- I'm sorry I misunderstood. If this is true, it's completely crazy. How does Google think they can tell people what products to sell on their own shops?? Then I would completely agree with what the OP did, of course. In fact, there really was no other way.

> How does Google think they can tell people what products to sell on their own shops?

They don't. They tell you that if you want to advertise with them then you can't sell that stuff. Big difference.

The problem is that Google is heading into monopoly territory - the same as MS back in the 90s, same as all the old telecomms companies, etc. At some point in the near future they'll be hit with anti-monopoly legislation, not sure whether it'll be the EU or US that does it first, but I don't think it's far off.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#162

Post by takluyver »

ckb wrote: post #111
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.

Should paring and chef's knives be illegal then? They don't require opening at all, can be quite sharp, and are widely distributed. Baseball bats, tire irons, icicles: almost anything can become an untraceable weapon.

That's roughly how it works in the UK: it's illegal to carry any knife besides a pocket knife in public without good reason. If you use knives at work, taking them to and from work is considered good reason.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#163

Post by SoftwareMaven »

curiousfiddler wrote: post #88
readme wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Can you name a few other companies which operate at Google's scale and are less evil? I feel Google has had a big contribution in how open internet as a medium is. I'd like to believe that the people at Google's helm are generally nicer, and can be trusted with this massive responsibility (more than a lot of other people and other companies). I also believe and hope, that they are picking signals from these conversat…

I agree, Google has had a contribution to the openness of the web. Unfortunately, in their haste to follow the paths of Apple and Facebook, they no longer seem to be making a contribution anymore. If anything, they are now actively "closing" the web.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#164

Post by dboat »

coolsunglasses wrote: post #100
scarmig wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As they say, the Cossacks work for the Czar. They have always worked for the Czar. If a big institution screws you over but has found a clever way of perpetually evading or delegating away vocal blame for that... they're still responsible, unless they're fixing the system in the very-near term. If the resources aren't there to fix the system, that's because they've consciously chosen not to allocate those resources.

"They" do not say it, DeLong does.

For others unfamiliar with the reference: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2006/05/remember_the_co.html?c...

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#165

Post by TomGullen »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #163
curiousfiddler wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name a few other companies which operate at Google's scale and are less evil? I feel Google has had a big contribution in how open internet as a medium is. I'd like to believe that the people at Google's helm are generally nicer, and can be trusted with this massive responsibility (more than a lot of other people and other companies). I also believe and hope, that they are picking signals from these conversat…

I agree, Google has had a contribution to the openness of the web. Unfortunately, in their haste to follow the paths of Apple and Facebook, they no longer seem to be making a contribution anymore. If anything, they are now actively "closing" the web.

How do you believe they are "closing the web"?

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#166

Post by [deleted] »

greyboy wrote: post #105
vacri wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has knife crime but not knife murder , despite what the fearmongering press would have you believe. The UK murder rate is a quarter that of the US, and is in line with similar countries.

The UK also has 1/5 the US' population - what does all this mean?

[deleted]

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#167

Post by SoftwareMaven »

cromwellian wrote: post #144
josefresco wrote: post #7

Being an AdWords veteran (having managed campaigns for several clients) all I could do was nod my head grumble under my breath about how this is "business as usual" for Google. One of my clients who was selling in the health market had this and other seemingly "unfair" treatments happen again and again over the years. All the while Google was taking money from Canadian "pharmacies" and allowing big brand competitors…

Google got sued over online drug ads before and had to pay $500 million in fines. The US Government was even running a criminal probe against Google that could have put executives in jail for these kinds of ads. So you can only imagine they are a lot more careful now given that experience. Alcohol, Weapons, and Drugs are areas regulated by various governments around the world and carry civil and criminal policies for…

What credentials does Google have to decide what is bogus versus what is not? Why should they get to decide what ads (for legal products) have a chance of being shown to me? Perhaps more importantly, especially for entrepreneurs, why should the effective "gateway to the Internet" be allowed to capriciously choose to favor established brands over small companies?

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#168

Post by mtraven »

anigbrowl wrote: post #156

I watched his video that purported to explain the difference between a switchblade and a spring assisted knife. As far as I can tell the only difference is that the location of the switch has changed. This is a distinction without a substantive difference. So yo would need a slightly different hand movement to trigger this alternative spring-assisted knife. Big deal; as someone who used to like knives enough to have…

According to their site the assisted-opening knives are legal in all states, whereas switchblades aren't, so there must be some meaningful distinction (unless the law just hasn't caught up yet).

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#169

Post by learc83 »

Anechoic wrote: post #33
mindcrime wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knives, nunchucks, brass knuckles, etc. are usually covered by state level laws, from what I've seen, and the legality varies widely. Firearms are a slightly different story, since the 2nd Amendment very specifically protects firearms ownership. So yes, it is possible that somewhere or other, a switch blade knife is illegal while an "assault rifle" is legal. I saw "assault rifle" in quotes, because most people talkin…

since the 2nd Amendment very specifically protects firearms ownership I've seen folks use that rationale, but the 2A doesn't say "firearms" it says "arms" - presumably "knives, nunchucks, brass knuckles, etc" would fall under that, although that's clearly not how it's been interpreted.

The Georgia legislature recently rewrote our concealed carry laws to allow license holders to carry knives as well.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#170

Post by bigiain »

Roedou wrote: post #99
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…

As is often the case, Google has to find a line that allows legitimate brands to do their thing, but also make sure that smaller/less legitimate sites not exploit their systems. Google won't tell Amazon/Target/Walmart, to stop selling a product or get banned from AdWords. But a small retailer who wants to circumvent the rules could capture PPC traffic for a similar (but legitimate) product, and then funnel people to…

Did anybody else read through that keyword-heavy body text, and think "I wonder if they'll really get away with trying to own the organic SERPs while the Adwords team are swatting down their paid placements?"
Post reply on HN