sponsored / ˈspɒnsəd /
adjective
A fraudulent website or application that appears while using Google services
I recommend everyone tonuse an adblock and switch off of big tech products because fuck them
thought I had read doggy ads for a second, got confused as shit when I saw the pics
Lacking regulations that are genuinely enforced, they will only put a brick on the gas pedal in response to any resistance.
If I were in government, I would make Google liable for any ad they show. They took money for that ad, therefore they are responsible for the content of that ad.
Are any of the ads on social media not dodgy? I opened YT without adblock not so long ago and was immediately served ads for scam product from China. Facebook was also full of ads that were obvious scams.
My mom got served a virus from front page of Google. Living without adblock was always bad, nothing changed.
Should we try to coin the term:
“Beer’s Razor”
The purpose of a system is what it does…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does
Twice I have tried to report this one, here’s their response:
Here’s what we found
We decided not to take this ad down. **We found that the ad doesn’t go against Google’s policies,** which prohibit certain content and practices that we believe to be harmful to users and the overall online ecosystem.
If it wasn’t for youtube and my 20 year old gmail account i wouldn’t be using anything from them
This is really only an issue if you browse the WWW without adblock.
And it seems that this guy does it on a mobile device, which is the second mistake.
Two thoughts :
- This particular example of adversarial advertising is directly targeting a competitor
- The author asks why Google aren’t using their AI tools to combat these, which is a fair question. Surely they are using AI, of course, but no chance in hell are they using the same Gemini the public gets. It’s going to be tailored to their ends, not the public-facing model the author interacted with.
I’ve seen my niece and her friends get incredibly sexual ads on their YT before. Taught them both how to install adblock even on an iPhone and managed to make them not see that shit anymore. Mind you, my niece and her friends are FOURTEEN!
I felt like such an adult when they were getting excited that Fandom didn’t have ads anymore when I showed them what a DNS sinkhole is. This is what it means to be an adult. To use your wisdom to help the new generation navigate theirs.
That’s the best kind of praxis, because it will (hopefully) outlive you.
Is it really praxis tho? Like it is just being a good guardian to my niece and her friends. I get it to an extent that ‘ads are the price you pay for using a service for free’ but to what end? Google is a massive company and should vet the advertisements they allow a lot more.
The fact children are getting highly sexual ads is a failure on their part and I see blocking ads as a fair reprisal to them until they can sort themselves out. It’s my civil disobedience as a consumer. Like especially these days with how massively invasive ads have become.
If it were me in their place I could imagine your actions being impactful, and inspiring further action or thought. At that age I was very interested in going against the grain. It was a different time, but not too long ago. Really no one wants to see ads, for sure, so it’s still a win, even if the anti-surveillance ad message is not of interest.
My view is that 15 years ago (maybe longer) “ads are the price you pay” was valid. They weren’t tracking everything you do… yet. They’ve gone too far and until they stop there’s no reason for you play by the rules either.
I just reported an ad that used a national newspaper name and logo to send you to a fake Amazon page that uses Amazon name and logo. Google’s response: “We decided not to take this ad down. We found that the ad doesn’t go against Google’s policies”
They don’t change… I had the same problem some 5 years ago. There was an ad for olive oil using the logo of a famous supermarket around here, and a fairly similar website to the supermarket one. I reported that ad 5 times, got the same “this ad does not violate Google’s policies” response each time. Until my mother clicked on it and was scammed out of her money.
I came to the conclusion that the only solution was to be done with google, I started using nextDNS in my entire network, changed all standard search for duckduckgo, and installed ad block all over.
Well yeah , I mean if you consider that Google’s policy is “Be Evil”, then everything’s fine.
Because they’re blood soaked assholes who would be facing very uncomfortable consequences if there was justice in the world.
PSA: if you see a blood soaked asshole, refer them to a medical specialist as soon as possible.
This is why you should never try to remove hemorrhoids with a potato peeler.
Username checks out?
Because the US refuses to regulate tech
even if they did try to regulate this it wouldn’t go away unless the regulations were completely overhanded. Those ads aren’t ran by reputable buisness so thry probably wouldn’t be affected by getting banned anyways.
But why won’t any other country do it either? Or are these ads only displaying to US IP addresses?
Because the US is aggressive towards countries that try. Also the companies are so large that they can exclude an entire country from their services.
A smaller country can take Facebook to court and might get a settlement but only a us court can truely punish them. With jail, breaking them up, law changes affecting their main customer base etc.
Exactly. Case in point: https://lemmy.zip/post/71167170
Because Google’s corporate philosophy is “Anything for a buck” which is of course quite different from the “Dont Be Evil” they started with…
Google operated by “don’t be evil” right up until they merged with Double Click. That merger itself forcibly removed the “don’t.”
