← Back to context

Comment by chamomeal

7 months ago

Now there’s a fun idea!! I wonder how difficult it would be to spoof events.

Edit: looks like this might exist already: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adnauseam/

Since installing it on firefox on this computer (18 months ago or so) Ad Nauseam has clicked ~$38,000 worth of ads, that i never saw.

Between this and "track me not" i've been fighting back against ads and connecting my "profile" with any habits since 2016 or so. I should also note i have pihole and my own DNS server upstream, so that's thiry-eight grand in ad clicks that got through blacklists.

https://www.trackmenot.io/faq

  • [Preface: I hate ads, I love uBlock origin, I use pihole, I'm a proponent of ad blockers]

    I manage a Google Ads account with a $500,000 budget. That budget is spent on a mix of display ads, google search, and youtube ads.

    If I knew that 10% of our budget was wasted on bot clicks, there's nothing I can do as an advertiser. We can't stop advertising... we want to grow our business and advertising is how you get your name out there. We also can't stop using Google Ads - where else would we go?

    $38,000 in clicks boosts Google's revenue by $38k (Google ain't complaining). The only entity you're hurting are the advertisers using Google. Advertisers might see their campaigns performing less well, but that's not going to stop them from advertising. If anything, they'll increase budgets to counteract the fake bot clicks.

    I really don't understand what Ad Nauseam is trying to achieve. It honestly seems like it benefits Google more than it hurts them. It directly hurts advertisers, but not enough that it would stop anyone from advertising.

    Google has a system for refunding advertisers for invalid clicks. The $500k account that I manage gets refunded about $50/month in invalid clicks. I'm guessing if bot clicks started making a real dent in advertiser performance, Google would counter that by improving their bot detection so they can refund advertisers in higher volumes. If there's ever an advertiser-led boycott of Google Ads, Google would almost certainly respond by refunding advertisers for bot clicks at much higher rates.

    • > I really don't understand what Ad Nauseam is trying to achieve. It honestly seems like it benefits Google more than it hurts them.

      Google is part of the problem, but they're neither the only ones nor best to target through bottom-up approaches.

      > It directly hurts advertisers, but not enough that it would stop anyone from advertising.

      You know the saying about XML - if it doesn't solve the problem, you are not using enough of it.

      > there's nothing I can do as an advertiser. We can't stop advertising...

      We know. The whole thing is a cancer[0], a runaway negative feedback loop. No single enlightened advertiser can do anything about it unilaterally. Which is why the pressure needs to go up until ~everyone wants change.

      --

      [0] - https://jacek.zlydach.pl/blog/2019-07-31-ads-as-cancer.html

      2 replies →

    • You know, I'm not too worried that I'm making the lives of people who spy on me harder and wasting their money.

      You don't have to buy privacy violating ads. You don't have to buy targetted ads

      3 replies →

    • > I hate ads

      > The only entity you're hurting are the advertisers using Google.

      That’s fine. Advertising is cancer. Reducing advertisers’ ROI is good too.

      You don’t hate ads if you’re spending $500k on them. You just hate receiving ads, which makes you hypocritical.

      2 replies →

    • The point is to poison your ad tracking profile so that advertisers can't figure out who you are and what you'll buy.

      No matter how secure your browser setup is, Google is tracking you. By filling their trackers with garbage, there's less that can personally identify you as an individual

      1 reply →

    • By hurting the advertisers you hurt google. It sucks that you are disadvantaged by it, but the truth of the matter is that once it becomes expensive enough it will not be worth it economically. And it is clear from your own message this is the only language you're willing to speak.

      1 reply →

    • Ads hurt people by stealing attention and manipulating spending intentions. Being exposed to a firehose of them makes us more stupid and poorer.

    • I think the idea is that hurting entities who are pushing out a lot of ads is a good thing.

    • > It honestly seems like it benefits Google more than it hurts them. It directly hurts advertisers, but not enough that it would stop anyone from advertising.

      GP fights agains ads, not Google. And not being able to win 100% of the gain shouldn’t restrain someone from taking action it they consider the win share worth the pain.

      > $38,000 in clicks boosts Google's revenue by $38k

      You should include costs here, and if (big if) a substantial part of the clicks comes from bots and get refunded, the associated cost comes on top of the bill. At the end the whole business is impacted. I agree 50/50k is a penny through.

      > I hate ads […] I manage a Google Ads account

      [no cynism here, I genuinely wonder] how do you manage your conscience, mood and daily motivation? Do you see a dichotomy in what you wrote and if so, how did you arrive to that situation? Any future plan?

      I’m asking as you kind of introduce the subject but if you’re not willing to give more details that’s totally fine.

    • > I'm guessing if bot clicks started making a real dent in advertiser performance, Google would counter that by improving their bot detection so they can refund advertisers in higher volumes.

      They already have methods to detect a lot. Like you said yourself, customers have no alternative, so why would they refund money they don't have to?

    • I’d hope you’ll find an advocacy group to join who’ll sue google for billions in fraud and lost revenue.

    • > I hate ads, I love uBlock origin, I use pihole, I'm a proponent of ad blockers. I manage a Google Ads account with a $500,000 budget.

      If you can write this without seeing how you are the very worst of our enemies, then I do hope your business die, there is obviously nothing that will make you understand. I still can't believe you put those words together, honestly.

      Do you see yourself as a separate breed from your lowly users or something? How can you inflict and even try to justify what you yourself avoid and say you "hate"?

      2 replies →

    • This is great. I seek out competitors to the companies that advertise so I can get the product without rewarding advertisers.

      Man scape? Nah, generic women's razers. Pcbway? Nope. JLCPCB.

      Screw your ads. Find a better way.

      5 replies →

    • Oh well. Advertisers are the scum of the earth, the only thing worse is those facilitating them. Driving a wedge between advertisers and googles is a win.

  • What do you expect this to do, long term? I’m curious.

    • Even if it merely makes using Google shenanigans unattractive for advertisers, that would be a huge win against one of the biggest perpetrators, privacy and data protection violators out there.

      2 replies →