Facebook seems not to be paying app developer $160K in ad revenue • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook seems not to be paying app developer $160K in ad revenue

#111

Post by tluyben2 » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 11:35 PM UTC

st3v3r wrote: post #106

tluyben2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they indeed can distinguish between those then they surely are frauding publishers out of money. As they use the fraudulent clicks story a lot: if they can recognize them, why ban the publishers and not just remove those clicks/views? Makes no sense. It is just a perverse incentive and powerplay (after all these years there is no competition).

" if they can recognize them, why ban the publishers and not just remove those clicks/views? Makes no sense." Not banning them is the move that doesn't make sense. You have someone who is purposefully trying to subvert the rules. Why oh why would you allow them to continue?

Because the publisher might not be at fault: it is a good way to get a competitor out of business and that has happened. Have a botnet click on your competitor, he gets banned and loses income? How does that make sense?

And have to mention Google can use this to ban anyone without any justification otherwise. Which was the topic.

Re: Facebook seems not to be paying app developer $160K in ad revenue

#112

Post by tluyben2 » Thu, Oct 13, 2016, 12:05 AM UTC

annnnd wrote: post #94

tluyben2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they indeed can distinguish between those then they surely are frauding publishers out of money. As they use the fraudulent clicks story a lot: if they can recognize them, why ban the publishers and not just remove those clicks/views? Makes no sense. It is just a perverse incentive and powerplay (after all these years there is no competition).

Because they must not allow publishers to try guessing which methods might be able to escape the scrunity of G. If they can recognize 99.997% of fraudulent clicks and fail at 0.003%, you can be sure that those 0.003 will soon balloon to 10% if publishers are allowed to experiment unchecked. But yes, it is a powerplay. They can afford this, so they do.

But it might not be the publishers: it can and often are competitors. It is quite normal that people, from all walks of life, ask me if I search for their company in Google, to click on competitors' adwords. If the small entrepreneur thinks like that then it is not a stretch (and I know companies who did just that) to think many are actually hiring people and bots to click on adwords and adsense of competitors.

Re: Facebook seems not to be paying app developer $160K in ad revenue

#113

Post by thesmok » Thu, Oct 13, 2016, 12:20 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #103

awiedmer wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

s/almost at random/via machine learning/

If that's the case, then their machines have a learning disability, at least as applied in my case and those of a few people that I know.

Why? Did you manage to get your money?