What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
169 Comments
- zaffir, on 11/14/2008, -12/+214So they found one malware site advertising on Google, and Google removed it when notified. What the problem is? You expect Google to vet every single one of its advertisers? Where do you draw the line between "scam" and "bad service"? I saw a billboard for Jiffy Lube the other day; if I go there and they totally screw up my car with an "engine flush" can I blame the owner of the billboard?
- CristianRaiber, on 11/14/2008, -40/+149there are a few possible scenarios :
1) Google doesn't give a sh** about it's users, they're in it just for the money...
2) They're paying a high CPC
3) Is there anything else to say ? - indyGuy, on 11/14/2008, -16/+114Because google's in it for the money, bitches.
- benologist, on 11/14/2008, -10/+88Just one last thing..... with ***** only knows how many people advertising on AdWords Google can't be expected to monitor every single site in real time, and with the size of their corporation just because one division knows it's a malware site doesn't mean the rest of the company does let alone has access to that info.
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -8/+57Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If they did screen the ads, everyone would cry that they're censoring the web. While this may be a clear cut case for screening, there would be millions of others sites hat would be in a gray area.
- rickyd1, on 11/14/2008, -10/+58Money Talks
- adarkmethod, on 11/14/2008, -5/+41they remove malicious ads when notified, almost immediately. I challenge anyone to deal with the volume of content they do and do a better job of screening.
don't like google, use a completing service, plenty exist. - benologist, on 11/14/2008, -5/+39I'm saying they're so big they can't possibly screen all of their customers and ads to guard against the tiny minority with bad intentions, so they react when they're reported. Just like the rest of the internet.
A prime example is digg comments. Do you think it's unreasonable that digg has a 'report abuse' option for comments? Are they supposed to be personally screening every single comment posted on this site? - JerichoKS, on 11/14/2008, -9/+39It's all about the benjamins baby!
- GeoNine, on 11/14/2008, -0/+27I see what you're saying, and I agree for the most part, but I think what they are trying to point out in this article is that Google is not using the same "blacklist" for its search index and for its Ads.
- Denominator88, on 11/14/2008, -2/+25I'm an IT Consultant, and this Smit-Fraud (and varients like AV 2008, 2009, XP etc) spyware/malware, is the most common thing we encounter by far. Every week I clean at least one infection on a computer. I actually just cleaned a laptop from someone who actually BOUGHT the malware. It's not a pretty thing.
- conna, on 11/14/2008, -4/+26what are ads? I have blocked them for so long I forgot what the they look like.
- Quenlin, on 11/14/2008, -2/+20Another reason I use Adblock Plus.
- martyFREEDOM, on 11/14/2008, -3/+21I am assuming it because they run thousands of ads, some of them are likely to slip through. Besides, if you flag an ad to them they will get rid of it if they find that it is malicious.
- grillcover, on 11/14/2008, -1/+19Furthermore, if you bother to read TFA, you'll note that once it was brought to Google's attention, it was removed from their ad network.
Me? I'm satisfied with that. I hope there are no more than three people at Google trying to figure out how to avoid bad ads-- because honestly, Google has so, so much better to do with its time and money. And if they're willing to jump on noted offenses? That's better customer service than you find in most companies/industries.
So, to answer the submission's question: Wahh wahhhhh wahhhhh - benologist, on 11/14/2008, -2/+19Not the same at all. XP SP2 was created by a specific group of people in a controlled environment. Whether it's secure or not is irrelevant, the source of it is trusted.
Google's ads can be created by anyone anywhere for any purpose and as long as you can get past their automated checks then you are good to go.
It's exactly the same as relying on users to report abuse on Digg, YouTube, Flickr, Wikipedia and countless other websites where you have a huge stream of user-created content pouring in. - UNL1M1T3D, on 11/14/2008, -2/+19I think linking to Malware infected sites is a good way to hurt your brand.
- oxkr1320, on 11/14/2008, -0/+16who clicks on google ads anyway
- dcmjzero, on 11/14/2008, -3/+18How about this reason: THEY ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS. Google is not the internet police, nor should they be. The only ads they should not show are ones that will cause harm to Google's brand or that run afoul of laws.
- newman8r, on 11/14/2008, -2/+17only if you're on acid, my friend
- revjustin2, on 11/14/2008, -4/+19You can't depend on corporations to care about you. You are not their bottom line. Let the buyer (or user in this case) beware.
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -6/+20Do no evil, outsource it.
- Tiak, on 11/14/2008, -0/+14Alternatively, do what most of us do, and don't see any of Google's ads.
- UNL1M1T3D, on 11/14/2008, -0/+11My dad calls them plentiums.
- benologist, on 11/14/2008, -2/+12Not disputing that they need to be responsible, just pointing out that they're being responsible in the defacto standard way for sites with user-submitted content.
It extends past the internet too really. The police can't investigate everyone constantly so for the most part they rely on people telling them who's breaking the law. - zaffir, on 11/14/2008, -0/+10That is an excellent point.
- j3ff86, on 11/14/2008, -1/+11no, it's all about the pentiums!
- drunkninja, on 11/14/2008, -0/+10What y'all wanna do?
Wanna be hackers? Code crackers? Slackers
Wastin' time with all the chatroom yakkers?
9 to 5, chillin' at Hewlett Packard?
Workin' at a desk with a dumb little placard?
Yeah, payin' the bills with my mad programming skills
Defraggin' my hard drive for thrills
I got me a hundred gigabytes of RAM
I never feed trolls and I don't read spam
Installed a T1 line in my house
Always at my PC, double-clickin' on my mizouse
Upgrade my system at least twice a day
I'm strictly plug-and-play, I ain't afraid of Y2K
I'm down with Bill Gates, I call him "Money" for short
I phone him up at home and I make him do my tech support
It's all about the Pentiums, what?
You've gotta be the dumbest newbie I've ever seen
You've got white-out all over your screen
You think your Commodore 64 is really neato
What kinda chip you got in there, a Dorito?
You're usin' a 286? Don't make me laugh
Your Windows boots up in what, a day and a half?
You could back up your whole hard drive on a floppy diskette
You're the biggest joke on the Internet
Your database is a disaster
You're waxin' your modem, tryin' to make it go faster
Hey fella, I bet you're still livin' in your parents' cellar
Downloadin' pictures of Sarah Michelle Gellar
And postin' "Me too!" like some brain-dead AOL-er
I should do the world a favor and cap you like Old Yeller
You're just about as useless as jpegs to Hellen Keller - JonForTheWin, on 11/14/2008, -5/+14I use GNU+Linux, I ***** went there.
- raydeen, on 11/14/2008, -2/+11What does Google care. They're running Linux.
- renegadeafk, on 11/14/2008, -0/+8Yeah I've had to clean this off family computers tons of times. And even though they all have up to date a/v they are always stupid enough to get i9nfected somehow.
- JEWestbrookJR, on 11/14/2008, -11/+19I've always wondered about this. Google allows ads for malware and some obvious scams. Sometimes illegal ones. Is there just too much for them to want to filter through? Or do they just not care?
- kidlinux, on 11/14/2008, -1/+8What faceless bureaucrats and corporations have access to the information I host with Google?
Who's doing all this "surveillance"?
There are medications for paranoia, you know. Maybe look into that.
A couple of points: if Google ever started selling data the consumer backlash would ensure they pay the price for their actions. And if it ever came to the point where the government had unfettered access to the data, you'd have much bigger problems to deal with (like why your government is actually surveilling on such a massive scale.) - muzzik, on 11/14/2008, -0/+7Guys I'm pretty sure this is just a mistake. AdWords has policies against these kinds of sites
https://adwords.google.com/support/bin/static.py?p ...
Remember its in Google's best interest to make the internet a better place - meleemaster500, on 11/14/2008, -2/+9Best Google ad EVER!
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/imgad? ... - MLGLies, on 11/14/2008, -2/+9Dugg for "What the Problem is?"
- spenner, on 11/14/2008, -5/+11Because antivirus xp 2008 is the bestest anti virus out there....no wait
- cdbeshore, on 11/14/2008, -1/+7My google adwords account was recently hacked. Someone advertising malware took it over and I found out the next day when it tried to charge over $3000 to my credit card ($20 or so max per day before). The campaign they set up was the kind of ads this article talks about. They set it up with a high CPC.
I immediately contacted google and they were very cool about it. I ended up getting a full refund, no questions asked. I had a good password on the site and I'm not dumb enough to fall to a phishing scam, so not sure what happened. Google took care of me and I commend them for it.
So there's at least one answer... - willski, on 11/14/2008, -1/+7The thing is, their search index is undoubtedly bigger than the number of advertisers they have, yet they manage to police that, don't they?
- JackSchittt, on 11/14/2008, -0/+6I know I'm probably a bastard for saying this, but I actually can't complain about stuff like this.
Why? Because it keeps the money rolling in for me.
Every time some idiot gets infected with this garbage, I end up getting paid $50 to clean it out. And I end up doing at least 1-2 of these per week.
I do feel bad, though, for the people who actually ended up forking over the cash for the "pro" version before they realized it's nothing but a scam. - ch40sBr1ng3r, on 11/14/2008, -2/+84. ????
5. Profit - jakem1, on 11/14/2008, -2/+8Funny how this is such an unpopular opinion here on Digg. Google has become the "cool" face of Big Brother and there are a lot of people out there who are too stupid to see it.
For those of you who don't think this is a big deal, do you really want faceless bureaucrats and corporations knowing everything about you and what you're up to? Even if you don't have something to hide, doesn't this level of surveillance worry you? - willski, on 11/14/2008, -0/+5I wouldn't expect them to vet the advertisers if they weren't already vetting the search results. Since they're doing the work on the search results, they should do the right thing, and apply that filter list to their advertising wing as well, whether it results in lost revenue or not.
- jakem1, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6Alternatively, do what I do and don't click on any of Google's ads.
- peter3118, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6None of the above. The ads that appear on a Google search are NOT decided upon by a human being. They automatically appear after a given search term is used via a proprietary algorithm formula that decides what ads appear--not a human. It is not perfect and sometimes ads appear that have little or nothing to do with what you’re searching for.
- OsiVert, on 11/15/2008, -1/+6You would think Microsoft would sue them or flex their muscle for using their logos.
- acidsurgery, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6You should try sex
- jakem1, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6I'd be more than happy to have all the ads on the internet censored away. Isn't that what AdBlock's for?
Maybe I'm getting too old but I can still remember the heady days of the early 90's when people thought that the internet could be a force for good, free of corporate control and advertising. - built2spill, on 11/14/2008, -1/+6Yes, I do expect them to vet every advertiser, even if that only means that they send a bot to their site to run a quick check.
- funkyp56, on 11/14/2008, -2/+6I do.....with your mom.........oooo Burn J/K Have a nice day :)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 175 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is