Technology

37730 readers

333 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

141

Google's monopoly in the ad industry lets them profit off allowing scam ads to flourish, with no consequences (checkmyads.org)

submitted 10 months ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/technology@beehaw.org

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Google is spoon-feeding fake “Shark Tank approved” weight loss gummy candies to innocent people — and making money doing it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Sort of a non-solution for the wider problem isn’t it?

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I actually think the "solution" is in this article right here.

I think people have been slowly waking up to internet advertising

Not being as good as it used to be in bringing in new/repeat customers
That generally the benefits and utility are failing because of the swamps of scam ads.

Ads are basically the only profitable part of Google, and it's ripe for a new search-model to undermine its now old-and-busted algorithms that are only surfacing AI-produced garbage and for a new ad-competitor that produces an ad-experience that people won't turn on adblockers for.

That was the original promise of AdBlock Plus, that they would make deals with advertisers who agreed to standards that made the ads non-intrusive and clear they were an ad.

I'm not against ads, I'm against an ad industry that thinks we owe them viewing their advertising. No, viewing advertising is a choice it's not a legal requirement for us to use the service, to click on ads and buy things.

If the ad industry could shape up, I wouldn't need uBlock Origin or a Pi-Hole.

There's an opportunity, someone just have to have the capital and take the chance.

[–] aniki@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

I'd probably still use PiHole but maybe ditch UBO.

[–] tesseract@beehaw.org 5 points 9 months ago

Sort of a non-solution for the wider problem isn’t it?

Honestly, I was wondering what people here are talking about. uBO is so effective that you don't notice either its presence or the ads it blocks. uBO might be a real effective solution for the problems you mention - until enough people use and start hurting Google's revenue. Even if it does, uBO is a necessary defense since Google ads are obnoxious and potentially harmful.