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

Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 282 posts

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#211

Post by marcosdumay »

hutzlibu wrote: post #175
marcosdumay wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean those laws that allows companies to get a reputation with their clients without a scammer being able to legally exploit it and confuse everybody?

Branding is ok. What I think is not OK but totally normal, is branding combined with advertisement. The name of the brand combined with all the perfect, beautiful and fun things of the world, so your name associates the brand with all the nice things. That is lying to me and I hate that it is the norm.

Oh, ok. You dislike brand advertising, that's reasonable.

I don't know if it's viable to separate good brand advertise (our soda tastes good, our bags last forever) from the bad kind (use our product and get all the pretty woman). Some regulation over emotional tone (and, of course, false info) may be much more successful than focusing on brands vs. unitary products.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#212

Post by pluma »

shawnz wrote: post #146
pluma wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Advertising is just a symptom of the root problem, capitalism. "Attention is currency in the marketplace of ideas" as they say. If everyone is supposed to vote with their dollar, you need to make them vote for you. The easiest way to do that is by fighting for your attention.

More like, capitalism is just a symptom of the root "problem" that humans are fundamentally self-interested

Have you ever considered that maybe being self-centered isn't human nature but the kind of behavior capitalism incentivises?

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#213

Post by simonh »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #110
simonh wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if literally the only way to get a phone, or even find out what phones there are, was through a carrier store. Take away advertising and the only way someone could find out about a product is word of mouth, or walking into a shop. Functionally everything would originate in shops. That means looking at the available options would be very time consuming, involve a lot of travel and be dominated by very powerful…

There are ways to optimize access to this information. Trade shows that display new products. Mail-order catalogs for companies or industry groups. Companies would find a way to make information - not ads - available for interested people to peruse. The core difference would be "pull not push", i.e. people with a problem would go looking for solutions, and very little space to compete on product information - prevent…

Of course there are workarounds, but they are time consuming and therefore expensive, but also less efficient and reliable. It would be going back to the 80s, but even more locked in to physical outlets as gatekeepers. You're really just exchanging an inconvenience for a tyranny.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#214

Post by tremon »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #93
bluesign wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liable is a bit strong word here, liability without fault is mainly rejected concept in modern world.

If so, why is the retailer liable but not the parent?

Because the parent is a natural person and the retailer is the last commercial entity in the chain. If the purchaser was a day-care center or other commercial entity, liability would be with them.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#215

Post by shawnz »

pluma wrote: post #212
shawnz wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like, capitalism is just a symptom of the root "problem" that humans are fundamentally self-interested

Have you ever considered that maybe being self-centered isn't human nature but the kind of behavior capitalism incentivises?

Yes, I've considered that and I think it is much more likely that capitalism was shaped based on us, its creators, rather than us being shaped by capitalism.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#216

Post by pluma »

shawnz wrote: post #188
hutzlibu wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are, but they are also also very social beings who sacrifice themself for others. Also, culture matters.

And capitalism enables occasional charity, if you want. So I'd say it's a pretty good parallel for our nature. Certainly though it's not the "root of the problem" when it comes to self-serving behaviour.

Capitalism "enables" charity in the same way capitalism "creates" products. It doesn't. Wealth enables charity, labor creates products.

Capitalism does however spread inequality, which in turn creates an opportunity for charity that wouldn't otherwise be necessary.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#217

Post by Nextgrid »

krn wrote: post #210
Nextgrid wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft? Major ISPs and wireless carriers? Basically any company that has a real product that people need can succeed without advertising. Maybe the real answer is that Shitbook is just not worth paying for?

> Microsoft? Major ISPs and wireless carriers? These are physical businesses, not internet companies. Bing has ads. Twitter has ads. Reddit has ads. Yahoo! has had ads since 1990s.

How is Microsoft a physical business? They provide services delivered online, just like Facebook, Google, etc does.

> Yahoo! had ads since 1990s. Twitter has ads. Reddit has ads.

And yet seems like Reddit is the only one doing somewhat good (and even then the community is pissed off and rightfully so, and without the community they'd suffer the same fate as the two former ones).

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#218

Post by blntechie »

penagwin wrote: post #181
tyingq wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google often has scummy ads as well. Haven't checked recently, but the ads on http://getpaint.net are often designed to look like download buttons to download the popular paint application. Scummy AdSense ads are harder to pin down, of course, because of the live bidding and personalization.

Just check (3/22/19) and yup sure enough https://i.imgur.com/6SMBjDa.png . I find this is pretty common with many software websites that have ads, I'm really surprised paint.net doesn't switch to carbon or something. EDIT: There's another one at the bottom of the page too. And they're randomized, some make it clear you aren't downloading Paint.net (such as the "Free Mac PDF Reader") but others aren't at all.

Why don't developers put a thick border with 'Advertisement' in bold around the ad space so that ads displayed doesn't look like they are native elements?

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#219

Post by tremon »

shawnz wrote: post #152
darkpuma wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are ways of becoming aware of what's available other than watching trailers. For instance, reviewing lists of recent releases then reading the wikipedia pages for them. The A/V format of trailers is fundamentally more coercive than text.

Television commercials are fundamentally more coercive than radio commercials, so should we all transition back to radio just to avoid those small additional coercive factors? No, of course not, there are benefits to television that are more important than those factors.

This isn't true in my experience, radio ads are much more intrusive as they hinge on one sensory experience only.

Re: Ad Fraud Scheme Drained Users’ Batteries By Running Hidden Video Ads In Android

#220

Post by shawnz »

pluma wrote: post #216
shawnz wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And capitalism enables occasional charity, if you want. So I'd say it's a pretty good parallel for our nature. Certainly though it's not the "root of the problem" when it comes to self-serving behaviour.

Capitalism "enables" charity in the same way capitalism "creates" products. It doesn't. Wealth enables charity, labor creates products. Capitalism does however spread inequality, which in turn creates an opportunity for charity that wouldn't otherwise be necessary.

Right, capitalism enables personal ownership which creates an opportunity for charity. Which parallels how humans and other animals behave in general. They seek out personal possessions but also sometimes understand the value of sharing them.
Post reply on HN