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

AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

adnauseam.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 344 posts

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#131

Post by cybernytrix »

NoGravitas wrote: post #34
Spoom wrote: post #29

At the risk of downvotes: Is anyone really surprised? AdNauseam is silently clicking ads. This directly costs Google money . Google happens to control the extension web store for their own browser. Removing it from the store really isn't that bad. Uninstalling it from existing browsers as malware? A little more malicious, but I would still consider it self defense. There is even a method to install it directly[1] whi…

According to TFA, they are also blocking manual installs and updates.

Oh yeah, they are doing no evil! Probably time to switch back to Firefox.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#132

Post by downandout »

ryanhuff wrote: post #112
downandout wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably can't, since it's an extension and thus uses the user's browser, IP, cookies etc (Adsense does use mouse tracking and other techniques that will likely flag these clicks as suspect, requiring additional analysis). Therein lies the problem. It appears to them as if someone is going and clicking on every ad, or is using an automated headless browser to click on ads. That can easily get you banned. Google…

How about clicks from browsers that have this plugin installed are just not counted? That sounds simple enough.

They could certainly do that in this case, but they are probably trying to send a strong message to would-be developers of similar extensions. One is a nuissance; a thousand would be much more difficult to chase down and block.

Also, if these developers really wanted to, they could distribute it directly from their site and dynamically generate the extension, packaged with a unique identifier, for each download. This would make it effectively unblockable. So simply identifying an install of this specific extension is not a solution.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#133

Post by 4684499 »

Spoom wrote: post #29

At the risk of downvotes: Is anyone really surprised? AdNauseam is silently clicking ads. This directly costs Google money . Google happens to control the extension web store for their own browser. Removing it from the store really isn't that bad. Uninstalling it from existing browsers as malware? A little more malicious, but I would still consider it self defense. There is even a method to install it directly[1] whi…

> This directly costs Google money.

1. Does a user searching without paying not cost Google's money?

2. Does a user using Chrome for free not cost Google's money?

3. They even built Chrome to boost advertising ecosystem.

4. Is there any law or ToS said users are not allowed to use a script to click the ads automatically? Are the advertising companies going to spy on me to check if I'm using a script?

5. Advertising surveillance directly violates my online privacy. Yet, "by using our services, you are agreed to our terms and conditions"

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#134

Post by notahacker »

nilved wrote: post #97
morley wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does Google deserve the shit for stopping people from taking money from them? I wouldn't think to give a department store shit for pressing charges against someone who smashed up a bunch of merchandise, whether or not the act was politically motivated.

Are you trying to relate clicking ads to smashing up merchandise?

Both actions are done with the stated intent of costing the target money. Sure, it only involves accessing URLs the public is actively encouraged to visit (in a manner intended to bring the system down) but so do many DDoS attacks...

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#135

Post by floweringlotus »

kylebenzle wrote: post #113
nimbix wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Click fraud is a standard industry term for robot initiated clicks, which this is a case of. What this extension generates are certainly not legitimate clicks form interested users, or even unintentional clicks that happen due to various reasons (some HN readers like to blame them on dark patterns, but they're really just of a consequence of the fact that ad tech is just not that great in general).

No, it is not. It is an industry term for robot initiated clicks for the purpose of profiting, that is the "FRAUD" part, just clicking random ads is not defrauding any party to the benefit of another, it just wastes resources.

Do you think it is fraud to order a pizza to be delivered to someone else's house, because you are a vegetarian and wish to destroy the business model of meat-based pizza?

How about doing this to every pizza store you encounter that serves meat?

You're not profiting..just wasting a business's resources by misrepresenting your identity and intentions.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#136

Post by inetsee »

I am curious. I have a question for all of the people who are in favor of AdNauseum.

How would you react if a website provider was able to detect that you were using AdNauseum, and they blocked your access to their website?

Edit: Expand the question to include other adblockers, not just AdNauseum.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#137

Post by acobster »

nimbix wrote: post #66
GlickWick wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course this could happen. This plugin automates clicking ads on a page, which does directly violate exactly what that section of the TOU is saying.

The users of this extension have a clear case of the "I'm allowed to poke the dog with a stick, but the dog is not allowed to bite me" mentality, so it's a complete surprise to them when it happens.

A friend of mine studied abroad in Cuba. There were wild dogs everywhere. One of his roommates was shocked at their treatment. She would feed them and try to pet them, until one day she was bitten.

So maybe it's OK to poke them preemptively, to keep them at a distance.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#138

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

mattlevan wrote: post #124
fryguy wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at it as the extension performs fraud, then what Google did is completely defensible. And I feel that it does. You may not feel that way exactly, but it's certainly justifiable that the extensions actions defraud the ad network.

Fraud? If a user wants to automate his browser to click all ads encountered as he surfs, that's fraud?

Fraud is a poor word choice, because it is a legal term. There must be a better word out there.

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#139

Post by _nalply »

square90 wrote: post #44

The Firefox extension review turned this up: "If you have a YouTube channel (s) and your logged in to that channel it will get your channel suspended for Violation of TOU #4 Section H" [1] Has anyone else confirmed this behavior on YouTube? 1. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/rev...

Better link (jumps directly to the review):

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/rev...

Re: AdNauseam Banned from the Google Web Store

#140

Post by floweringlotus »

_ofdw wrote: post #53
blauditore wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it a bit harsh to be so hostile towards online ads. After all, it's has been a significant source of income for innovative companies or services that couldn't exist otherwise, because users are notoriously reluctant to pay for virtual goods. Yes, tracking and overly intrusive fullpage popups are real issues, but not all ads are inherently evil.

I can't name a single online service that is supported by ads and that I couldn't live without. >not all ads are inherently evil. All advertising is manipulation. Advertisers are bad and should feel bad.

If I have a friend who I know is interested in a particular author, and I notice that that author has released a new book, is it evil for me to tell my friend?

I don't think it is. I'm connecting a producer and a consumer in both of their best interests. When the producer is the one who asks an entity like Facebook "who enjoys this author?" and advertises the new book to them, why is this evil?

People have desires, and without advertising it is very difficult to connect those people with producers who can fulfill them.

I think advertising isn't inherently evil, just some tactics used to persuade people with misinformation.

Post reply on HN