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

Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 220 posts

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#41

Post by runeks »

I find this really interesting. We’re all familiar with exploiting vulnerable software, but this appears to be exploiting a vulnerable business model.

Does this attack work with Facebook as well? I think the difference in client authentication might prevent this attack on Facebook (just ban accounts that click too many ads). But, on the other hand, Google might be able to use IP-addresses to accomplish the same.

Taking it to the next (morally questionable) level would be a virus that infects regular consumer devices, and delivers fake clicks from seemingly honest clients.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#42

Post by hi3980 »

nindalf wrote: post #34
hi3980 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this is in response to firing of that dude that said women are biologically disadvantaged at coding LOL. It probably is. What a pity that it took sympathizers/supporters of a sexist asshole to standup to Google.

> I wonder No it seems completely unrelated. To be honest I don't know how you linked these two events in your mind.

Easy. March on Google was planned in support of that guy. So why not an electronic protest to follow? What is the hard part about making the connection. Wait, a trick question, right? You're baffled...

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#43

Post by tannhaeuser »

Clickfraud has been a problem for as long as online ads exist. Its widespreadness has caused ad revenues to decline to the point of non-profitability years ago, and many web media outfits to close shop. On what basis should customers be refunded without actual, objectively measured clickstream data? This piece feels like a media campaign to make AdSense appear as premium service over alternatives to me.

The point is that, without incentives for quality content creation, there aren't that many web resources worth searching anymore. Have you checked your web usage recently? Do you actually go to Google search for your daily web consumption? Or could your search needs be fulfilled by, say, better StackExchange search?

Google is struggling to keep growth as ad revenues go to more evil companies such as Facebook, as their AMP project shows.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#44

Post by Buge »

Rjevski wrote: post #6

Couldn't have happened to a nicer industry. :) Just imagine for a second the total human time lost due to ads and all the productivity that could've been done in that time.

But also think of the human benefit gained from ads. Free search, free email, free news articles, free videos. Also consider how Hacker News survives.

As soon as you start charging a fee, you eliminate huge swaths of the world population. Ads are an equalizing force.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#46

Post by feelin_googley »

Rjevski wrote: post #6

Couldn't have happened to a nicer industry. :) Just imagine for a second the total human time lost due to ads and all the productivity that could've been done in that time.

"Just imagine for a second the total time lost due to..."

Did this many times over the years with respect to time lost as result of being forced to use a substandard operating system. Because it came preinstalled on PCs like the ones in used offices and there was no 386BSD yet.

The www did not come "preinstalled" with ads. But some companies want it to seem that way. False claim: "If no ads, then no www."

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#47

Post by chillydawg »

runeks wrote: post #41

I find this really interesting. We’re all familiar with exploiting vulnerable software, but this appears to be exploiting a vulnerable business model. Does this attack work with Facebook as well? I think the difference in client authentication might prevent this attack on Facebook (just ban accounts that click too many ads). But, on the other hand, Google might be able to use IP-addresses to accomplish the same. Taki…

A lot of people are perma logged into Google these days due to Gmail. They've got their claws in deep.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#48

Post by machtesh »

While the article talks about Adsense fraud, there's a ton of fraud happening on Adwords as well like competitors or bots that click on your ads to deplete your ad budget. Google provides refunds for some of those fraudulent clicks as well.

I'm a developer at https://www.clickcease.com/ a company that's been fighting click fraud for the past few years. If you're affected by click fraud, we can detect fraudulent ad clicks and automatically file refund claims with Google.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#49

Post by throwaway2048 »

z3t4 wrote: post #35
narrator wrote: post #22

I always thought it was funny that Google's billion dollar revenue model essentially relies on a trusted client.

I wonder what will happen when the Google revenue is threatened, we'll probably see something like ad DRM

So about Google AMP...

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#50

Post by bartread »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #43

Clickfraud has been a problem for as long as online ads exist. Its widespreadness has caused ad revenues to decline to the point of non-profitability years ago, and many web media outfits to close shop. On what basis should customers be refunded without actual, objectively measured clickstream data? This piece feels like a media campaign to make AdSense appear as premium service over alternatives to me. The point is…

That's an interesting point and I suppose the answer is maybe but what I've found is that the best, or certainly the easiest, way of searching StackExchange is Google.
Post reply on HN