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

241–250 of 341 posts

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#241

Post by jlgreco »

corresation wrote: post #233
jlgreco wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Knife has an edge actuator that, when pushed (by your thumb, the table you're leaning against...you know, anything that pushes on it), causes it to kinetically open. I think most of the people around here are fairly intelligent and can see countless accidental deployments scenarios, notwithstanding your endless cries of "bullshit!". You have clearly never used one of these knives, you are just pulling shit out of y…

I suggest you try posting minus variations of "bullshit" or "shit". It might be tough, but it will be worth it in the end. You have clearly never used one of these knives You refute me by making claims directly contrary to the video in the story being discussed . You know, the company making the product being discussed, where a protruding trigger is, with obviously little force via an index finger, actuated causing t…

> product being discussed, where a protruding trigger is, with obviously little force via an index finger, actuated causing the blade to immediately swing 180 degrees at a high rate of speed.

You were not discussing that. You were making claims about the broader category of knives saying: "No one using a knife as a tool is going to buy an assisted opening knife" (In response to someone who provided a concrete example of where such a knife may be used even!) If you are vilifying everyone that owns that general category of knife, then my experiences with another knife in that category could not be more relevant.

> The context of my comment on it is that people who actually use knives as tools don't use knives made for 14 year old boys, emblazoned with names like "SWAT" by gun makers. I stand by that.

You'll be glad to know then that mine is not. However you have yet to explain how gaudy aesthetics are at all relevant. What about the form of that knife do you think renders it unsuitable for practical non-violent use?

> I suggest you try posting minus variations of "bullshit" or "shit".

Do you prefer "crap"? I prefer "shit".

I think we are done here though. I'll leave you with this, two non-scary looking assisted opening knives explicitly for hunting, fishing, and camping. One hansom, the other gaudy yet 'non-military': http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Stainless-Steel-Assisted-Opening... http://compare.ebay.com/like/150975567917?var=lv&ltyp=Al...

Clearly both instruments of murder and mayhem.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#242

Post by quanticle »

Karunamon wrote: post #204
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…

>This is the same way you'd criticize a king, somebody you are beholden to. Or because you really like the company. I think you've misinterpreted the thoughts involved here.. Google is one I have pretty positive feelings about, not just because their applications are usually the best as far as web-based SaaS offerings go, they're free, usually painless (for most people), but also because they just plain make cool stu…

    Or because you really like the company.
Who says the two thoughts are mutually exclusive? In Imperial China, people genuinely loved the Emperor, even as they ran from his mandarins. In Soviet Russia, people genuinely loved Joseph Stalin, even as they ran scared from the NKVD and (later) the KGB. So it's entirely possible to love Google (the company), but think that the AdWords team or GMail team is being unfair and stupid.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#243

Post by jetti »

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.

I'm not suggesting that I agree with the logic, I'm just stating I can see some logic behind the statement. However, to answer your question, it is much harder to conceal any of those items. If you carry a chefs knife and intend to use it as a weapon, you would have to be careful in how you carried the knife to and from the location of the crime so that you don't cut yourself. On top of that, a chef's knife is quite large. A switchblade can be easily concealed in ones pocket and hidden in a sleeve then used and concealed again with virtually no risk of cutting the assailant.

" Baseball bats, tire irons, icicles: almost anything can become an untraceable weapon."

Perhaps I didn't pick my words correctly. What I mean is that I could stab somebody with a switchblade without drawing any attention to themselves after the fact. Not the same can be said about bulky items such as baseball bats, tire irons or even a chef's knife.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#244

Post by jameszol »

tehwalrus wrote: post #205

(from UK, and happy to accept your downvotes): I'm shocked that people litteraly sell knives designed to hurt people on the internet, and that people on HN come to the defence of these arms dealers . I assumed this was about kitchen knives when I clicked on the link. The US constitution was written with a right to bear arms so people could overthrow the government , not protect themselves from criminals. Since then,…

I've been interested in crime stats and arguments for some time; thus, I'm interested to know where you are getting your data to make such assumptions that UK criminals don't use weapons on civilians when sources dictate that the UK is among the most violent in Europe and perhaps 2x more violent than in the USA?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime#United_Kingdom

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573...

Dozens more sources similar to what you can find in the above links if you search via your favorite search engine.

Violence is classified somewhat differently in the UK; however, removing the differences in classification still shows the UK leading in violent crimes vs the US or a fair number of other countries.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#245

Post by adventured »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #167
cromwellian wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

What credentials? The only credentials they need: it's their platform.

Who is Walmart to decide what goes into their stores? After all, they make and break small companies every day of the week with those decisions, in just as dramatic fashion as the way Google does.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#246

Post by Kequc »

tehwalrus wrote: post #205

(from UK, and happy to accept your downvotes): I'm shocked that people litteraly sell knives designed to hurt people on the internet, and that people on HN come to the defence of these arms dealers . I assumed this was about kitchen knives when I clicked on the link. The US constitution was written with a right to bear arms so people could overthrow the government , not protect themselves from criminals. Since then,…

I was pretty surprised by the video the company willingly distributes advertising their wares. The comparison beween the illegal knife and the "legal" one was such that it left me feeling that the "legal" one was a more effective weapon.

Um. What.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#247

Post by throwaway420 »

capo wrote: post #227

Why is this sort of post even on HN, not to mention the front page? and why is this thread dominated by idiotic language about "evil" and "kings" and incoherent babbling about politics and democratic representation?! and suddenly everyone is a law scholar. I blame Matt Cutts' occasional appearances for the subsequent flocking of SEO sorts here. This post doesn't belong on HN, certainly not on the front page.

> I blame Matt Cutts' occasional appearances for the subsequent flocking of SEO sorts here. This post doesn't belong on HN, certainly not on the front page.

Your anger is misplaced. The blame is solely on Google for not having an adequate customer service department.

When Google has arbitrary decided that your business is in violation of some of its rules, you end up falling into a Kafkaesque nightmare of form responses and then you stop getting even those. The only way to get a response from Google in these cases is to LITERALLY get a popular post on Reddit or Hacker News. That's why small businesses post about this stuff here. Don't blame them.

Blame Google for not providing a decent customer service center because they want to shave a tiny bit of expenses.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#248

Post by Zak »

corresation wrote: post #142
daten wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the OP explains, the knives in question are not illegal and not in violation of Google's policies. Additionally, other vendors selling the same items are not being banned. I think the "evil" part relates to discriminating against certain vendors instead of treating all vendors equally and consistently.

As the OP explains, the knives in question are not illegal and not in violation of Google's policies They ARE in a clear violation of Google's policy which prohibits selling knives as weapons. They seem to have some confusion about the word of the ban, but as I linked elsewhere - http://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/176077?hl=en This is not at all unclear. The examples of banned knives are not the exhaustiv…

I disagree; the policy is unclear.

It mentions several categories of knives that are legally restricted in many jurisdictions. It then goes on to say that the promotion of swords and kitchen knives is allowed. Based on the OP's claims, it appears that utility pocket knives are allowed as long as they don't have assisted opening.

It's also not clear from this page that Google has a problem with the use of adwords to sell products not banned from advertising in a store that also sells products Google refuses to advertise.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#249

Post by archon »

tehwalrus wrote: post #205

(from UK, and happy to accept your downvotes): I'm shocked that people litteraly sell knives designed to hurt people on the internet, and that people on HN come to the defence of these arms dealers . I assumed this was about kitchen knives when I clicked on the link. The US constitution was written with a right to bear arms so people could overthrow the government , not protect themselves from criminals. Since then,…

> This is the sole reason I would never ever consider living in the USA

Just to provide a counter-anecdote, the fact that I couldn't legally own weapons capable of leveling the playing field between me and an armed criminal makes me disinclined to ever consider living in the UK. The best I can do for protection is a baseball bat? Terrifying.

Re: How Google Sliced Away Our Knife Ads

#250

Post by Kequc »

jameszol wrote: post #244
tehwalrus wrote: post #205

(from UK, and happy to accept your downvotes): I'm shocked that people litteraly sell knives designed to hurt people on the internet, and that people on HN come to the defence of these arms dealers . I assumed this was about kitchen knives when I clicked on the link. The US constitution was written with a right to bear arms so people could overthrow the government , not protect themselves from criminals. Since then,…

I've been interested in crime stats and arguments for some time; thus, I'm interested to know where you are getting your data to make such assumptions that UK criminals don't use weapons on civilians when sources dictate that the UK is among the most violent in Europe and perhaps 2x more violent than in the USA? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime#United_Kingdom http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-o…

The Telegraph is a conservative rag for one thing, like Fox news.

Even in that article it provides the number 927 murders in 2007. Compared to America's 16,929 murders in 2007. America's population is much larger than the UK though, 4.91 times. So you multiply the UK's murder rate by nearly 5 and get a paltry 4,557 compared to America's 16,929.

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offenses/violent_crime/murd...

http://www.usa-vs-uk.com/population.html

Post reply on HN