Live data from Hacker News

Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

joindatacops.com

91–100 of 312 posts

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#91
post #2

Hi HN. I run a marketing agency and fell down this rabbit hole after a client's analytics made no sense (50k visitors, 47 sales). I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. The average was 73% bot traffic that standard analytics counts as real. The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. I wrote up my findings, including some of the bizarre pat…

Does it really matter if it's all fraud? You track 47 sales over some period. What was the ad spend for that period? Combine that with previous data and that should be enough to figure out if it was a successful campaign or not. When a company puts up a billboard or an ad on the bus, they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs. All that matters is impact on the bottom line.

Because the digital ads environment has promised more data. That is slowly falling apart, but it has been expected for a decade or so now.

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#92
post #15

Would like to see the script. From reading it's impossible to tell if the methodology is sound. Would legitimate users with adblockers or disabling JS get counted is false positives, for example? That said, 73% doesn't come as a surprise. If anything I expect it to be higher. I guess this quote sums up the situation > When I tried to bring this up with a few major ad platforms, the conversation always followed a pred…

[deleted]

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#93
post #2

Hi HN. I run a marketing agency and fell down this rabbit hole after a client's analytics made no sense (50k visitors, 47 sales). I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. The average was 73% bot traffic that standard analytics counts as real. The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. I wrote up my findings, including some of the bizarre pat…

> I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. Why not use Microsoft Clarity? > The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. You would think Google Analytics would help a lot with this, but they seem to not care.

> You would think Google Analytics would help a lot with this, but they seem to not care.

Not just not care, but don't they have incentive to report higher traffic?

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it really matter if it's all fraud? You track 47 sales over some period. What was the ad spend for that period? Combine that with previous data and that should be enough to figure out if it was a successful campaign or not. When a company puts up a billboard or an ad on the bus, they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs. All that matters is impact on the bottom line.

Because the digital ads environment has promised more data. That is slowly falling apart, but it has been expected for a decade or so now.

Sounds like the bots might eventually restore privacy by accident by making the additional data all dross, leaving only sales correlative modeling.

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#95
post #69

I did work in the ad tech industry for almost 15y and big corp like Google/FB scam their user: - they don't allow double tracking, so you have to trust their numbers - if you look at IP from their "clicks", you see often a FB/Google datacenter IP range - and for most of the traffic they might send you, they did just clever algorithm and heavy profiling to stole your organic traffic. So they get this "amazing" perform…

> they don't allow double tracking, so you have to trust their numbers

Facebook Ads and SA360 both allow 3rd party impression and click tracking. Not to mention the myriad of 3rd party analytics tools you can use to track the website.

> if you look at IP from their "clicks", you see often a FB/Google datacenter IP range

I've never heard this before and seems hilariously simplistic. These megacorps don't have VPNs?

> they did just clever algorithm and heavy profiling to stole your organic traffic

Not sure if you had a stroke while writing this, but this makes no sense.

As someone who has also been in the industry for 10+ years, none of what you said passes the smell test. Maybe after 15 years you still never understood the industry or technology?

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does it really matter if it's all fraud Uh, yes. If you get 47 sales on $10k in ad spend (pay per click) and $9900 of that $10k was fraudulent then you got 47 sales on $100 of ad spend. Imagine if you could stop those fraudulent clicks.

And imagine how much more you’d have to pay for each of those clicks if everyone could stop those fraudulent clicks. In equilibrium it shouldn’t change the total ad spend.

That’s the point, without the fraudulent clicks you would just move on to some other strategy because the pricing would not be worth it.

Fake clicks give the illusion that ads are working and instead you have to optimize your funnel or whatever else.

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#97
post #2

Hi HN. I run a marketing agency and fell down this rabbit hole after a client's analytics made no sense (50k visitors, 47 sales). I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. The average was 73% bot traffic that standard analytics counts as real. The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. I wrote up my findings, including some of the bizarre pat…

“All clicks are click fraud” isn’t that far from the truth.

Yeah. Even in the extremely rare circumstance where if I actually want to see more about the product I specifically search it instead of clicking on it because everyone knows clicking on the ad is how you get infected, spied, on or scammed. And I think they already discarded 'views' long ago as too useless ironically.

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#98
post #2

Hi HN. I run a marketing agency and fell down this rabbit hole after a client's analytics made no sense (50k visitors, 47 sales). I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. The average was 73% bot traffic that standard analytics counts as real. The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. I wrote up my findings, including some of the bizarre pat…

Yes, and a lot of the pain is self-inflicted.

Too often I have been working on ecommerce gigs where the traffic comes from internal 'SEO' tools. Normally the person in charge is marketing, not technical, so it has always been difficult to get past identifying the problem to fixing it.

Often ecommerce companies are very siloed, so one person in one part of the 'team' is scraping the site with their special tools, only for another person to be doing another scrape with their special tools. You can have the guy doing the newsletter doing his thing, the guy doing organic search doing their thing, the guy doing paid ads doing their thing and someone in sales doing their own thing.

The sad thing is that they are typically just a few SQL joins away from exactly the data they want in a format they can digest. However, due to silo-ing, it can be hard to have that conversation.

On top of that, you do get new bots that need to be dealt with. The Huawei bot will scrape everything yet the store might not be delivering to China. So there are legit bots not doing ad fraud that need to be dealt with.

What I also find interesting is that nobody is interested in the server logs. They come for free, and, although not having CDN cache hits, they still record checkout transactions and any pages that don't have a freshly cached page.

Ad fraud also goes on in companies. I worked for a very successful company once and we only measured sales and what was out of stock. We didn't need open rates for emails or click through rates, our main problem was selling too much, which was a nice problem to have. Note that if you sell too much then you aren't going to get it all out the door in a timely fashion, or you run out of big lorries to put the orders in.

Since then I have not worked on a site that is as successful. Instead we have people getting praise for 'false metrics'. Anything an SEO person creates or a marketeer measures will always have some nonsense aspect to it. Or the accounting is mixed with brick and mortar sales even though free shipping and discounts have been given on each sale, with adwords used to get people through the 'door'.

Since sales manager has to report to someone on the board, if the sales numbers aren't good, the nonsense stats can be used to obfuscate the facts. The board only ever care about profit, so I don't like the way this goes down with false metrics of nonsense.

Another fundamental problem in ecommerce is a lack of basic salesmanship. If you work the shop floor doing specialist sales where you have to listen to the customer's needs, then you gain experience in the art of sales. You haven't got to be good at it, in fact it can be better to know your limitations, for me that is big ticket items where I don't have the product knowledge, however, I could always hand those sales over to a much more capable colleague.

You don't win every sale, but, in retail, you can have some really good streaks where no customer leaves empty handed. Your conversion rate is going to be more like 90% in face to face sales if you have the right product at the right price, with customers that don't buy coming back the following day or week to splash the cash.

In High Street retail there is no way you give customers 15%+ off just for stepping through the door. Yet this is table stakes in ecommerce, particularly for small to medium size shops. This instantly devalues the product.

Often there will be chatbots for whatever reason, and I am sure the likes of Dell can get that right, but your typical small ecommerce site will fluff this up too, so any customer daring to use the chatbot will not get instant help from a sales person.

So what to do?

It depends on your product, however, the goal is to get customers for life, not to churn through them. To achieve this it comes down to product, price, availability, shipping times, customer service and incentives for the customer to advertise for you, with reviews, word of mouth and all that hard stuff that needs real human skill. Sometimes it will only be a one-off sale, for example, if someone is buying a mattress. But, even then, the customer service basics matter.

What is also silly is how, with everything you buy, you will get adverts and incentives to buy what you have just purchased. I don't know why this is not considered career limiting, but nobody seems to have fixed this.

Next time, I will find out what data everyone needs and have my own script to collect just that data, then have a live backup that can be used for all internal purposes such as report generation. There will be no mystery script containers downloading 150 scripts with cookies, outside of developer supervision. My hunch is that the only numbers that really matter are sales.

As for why the sales aren't happening, so long as functionality is as it should be on all devices, then you have to dig deeper, to the knowledge level that only someone that has worked the showroom floor understands. Really, a website should be the sales person's knowledge condensed into HTML. Yet nobody asks the guy serving customers what they upsell or what product they recommend if a customer baulks at a given product. Instead we have mystery-meat AI scripts that manage these things.

Thanks for the heads up on ad fraud, normally I am a long way from that due to internal scraping efforts being far more damaging to website performance, and, as a developer, page load times matter to me far more than how much was paid for the traffic.

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the digital ads environment has promised more data. That is slowly falling apart, but it has been expected for a decade or so now.

Sounds like the bots might eventually restore privacy by accident by making the additional data all dross, leaving only sales correlative modeling.

Yes, that is more or less what is happening now, but also driven by AI. All marketing is moving back "up the funnel."

Re: Bots are getting good at mimicking engagement

#100
post #2

Hi HN. I run a marketing agency and fell down this rabbit hole after a client's analytics made no sense (50k visitors, 47 sales). I ended up building a simple script to track user behavior and analyzed 200+ small e-commerce sites. The average was 73% bot traffic that standard analytics counts as real. The bots are getting creepily good at mimicking engagement. I wrote up my findings, including some of the bizarre pat…

Does it really matter if it's all fraud? You track 47 sales over some period. What was the ad spend for that period? Combine that with previous data and that should be enough to figure out if it was a successful campaign or not. When a company puts up a billboard or an ad on the bus, they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs. All that matters is impact on the bottom line.

> they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs

they also don't get charged retroactively for each dashcam and dog that looks at the billboard

Post reply on HN