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.
Because like all ad companies, Google gives way less of a shit if the ads are malicious than they do there being lots of ads displayed.
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.”
Huh? Not for me. I kicked the big G out with DNS.
Me too, just fuck it all to hell. It’s nice not to have mobile apps tracking me either.
This and also the G sites not being displayed.
Right, but simply staying away from their websites doesn’t really solve the problem. You can ditch Google all you want but you won’t get away from their tracking on just about every third party app and website — they even load scripts on (US) government websites.
I have personalized ads turned of in YouTube and it seems half the ads are for gambling as of late.
If you’re seeing ads on YouTube, you’re doing it wrong.
I find this kind of response insufferable. It shifts the conversation from a systems critique to personal responsibility. You could have posted this in response the OP, and it would be equally on point and useless.
Critique the system all you like. The system doesn’t care. Call it ‘insufferable’ if you like, but ads are more insufferable. If there’s a way to solve the problem myself without waiting until some corporate overlord deigns to change anything, I’ll do that every time.
Your only point here though is “I’m so great, you suck” which frankly doesn’t help anyone. Maybe provide them some tips.
I’ll do that every time.
Not everyone will though. It’s not because they’re not as principled as you are, maybe they just lack the know-how or time.
Sharing the how and why would be more helpful - otherwise you’re just coming off as holier-than-thou. And no one wants to engage with that.
Wow. That really stinks for gambling addicts. It’s like they can’t get away from it. A lot of YouTube channels advertise gambling apps too.
Before I put adblockers on everything, I was served an ad for a stupid mobile shooter game, either on YouTube or Facebook, that started with a real life hunter shooting a coyote in the neck, which made it cry out in pain and tumble down a hill.
Now as a matter of sanity, I block all ads. If they can’t keep crap like that from being advertised, then fuck off.
#1 money/greed
#2 ineffective governmentWith enough money and greed, you can make a very ineffective government.
Why wouldn’t they?
It’s not like they face any consequences for being accessory to fraud. Laws are for poor people.
Money. Criminals and immoral people pay good money to show these ads. At least for Facebook, a court case regarding identity fraud has established that they knew quite well which ads were fishy, so they just charged those advertisers more. If I remember correctly, that amounted to about 10% of Facebook’s revenue. It will be a similar case for Google, I assume. Sketchy ads pay too well to remove all of them and laws make it so the platform is only liable if they don’t take it down after receiving notice of every single sketchy ad. Google, Facebook, and the others are all well near monopoly and built deep moats, so they don’t really have to fear losing customers, because there’s no simple alternative.
Because that makes them money. Next question.
It’s for a church. NEXT.
(If you’ve never seen it)
Always gets a chuckle out of me
An all-time classic. You can hear the lead clanking in their bloodstream
Always a good read.
In that screenshot alone they had offers for enough space to handle 18 of the 20 people. But they just have to be an asshole about it.
I honestly always believed that it was a church busy body that was doing this. She probably has a small track record of resolving issues like this in the past and it just went straight to her head.
Correct, it’s always that answer for ‘why is company x doing’
That was my knee jerk reaction, but then I thought,“Hey, don’t be one of those people that only read the headlines and react to the click bait!” So I opened it and read it. Yep, should have just stuck with that first reaction and saved myself 30 seconds. Money. It’s always money.
There’s a suprisingly large number of people who I have had to tell that Google sells ad space. They’re a digital billboard company but with the ability to target and tailor that ad space to the people who’s eyes they want to put it in front of. People just don’t know or care or both.
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.
If google can’t serve ads responsibly to the entire world then then need to limit their ad network to a uaerbase that they can manage. Thats considered extremely hostile in current age but I think its reasonable.
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
