11–20 of 24 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, makes you wonder if there's someone internally who's been scamming companies
IMO it's more likely to be that they know full well those bots are skewing the figures underpinning their valuation and their general popularity with investors. They're trying to quietly move the narrative away from that part by focusing on the naming issue.
It seems likely this was a mistake, and not the result of dishonesty or malicious intent. That said, such an enormous mistake should have never been made in the first place, especially by a company such as Facebook.
Can we please see some actual numbers! Given the advertiser's "popularity" it's possible they were over-charged something like $4 for a few hundred clicks in which case it's certainly not an enormous mistake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can we please see some actual numbers! Given the advertiser's "popularity" it's possible they were over-charged something like $4 for a few hundred clicks in which case it's certainly not an enormous mistake.
Err, I don't think people are up in arms over the damage done to this one company. The story has legs because it implies that this is happening on a larger scale, and that Facebook is making a significant portion of its revenue from valueless clicks. Facebook should have had a system to avoid charging for such clicks, and if it doesn't that's a huge nationwide story. And it wouldn't be because they didn't realize the…
It also earns a tonne of revenue through fraudulent clicks many by competitors. It's a big deal and Facebook needs to make attempts to fix it but the problem will never be completely solvable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, makes you wonder if there's someone internally who's been scamming companies
IMO it's more likely to be that they know full well those bots are skewing the figures underpinning their valuation and their general popularity with investors. They're trying to quietly move the narrative away from that part by focusing on the naming issue.
He could turn Facebook into a porn site and there isn't anything anybody can do about it. So when you understand this you will see how ridiculous this notion is that Facebook is complicit in scamming advertisers.
Also do people not remember when this was (and still is) happening with Google ? It's like spam. You can manage it but never really get rid of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can we please see some actual numbers! Given the advertiser's "popularity" it's possible they were over-charged something like $4 for a few hundred clicks in which case it's certainly not an enormous mistake.
Read the original article - it was around $150 he wants refunded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO it's more likely to be that they know full well those bots are skewing the figures underpinning their valuation and their general popularity with investors. They're trying to quietly move the narrative away from that part by focusing on the naming issue.
You seem to forget that Zuckerberg owns majority voting stock. He could turn Facebook into a porn site and there isn't anything anybody can do about it. So when you understand this you will see how ridiculous this notion is that Facebook is complicit in scamming advertisers. Also do people not remember when this was (and still is) happening with Google ? It's like spam. You can manage it but never really get rid of i…
This was predicted.