5 ms·
Maybe if Google went with "Pay us $10 per month for us not to show you any AdSense anywhere on the web", this would be successful. In this form, I highly doubt
by r3bl 9y ago
Maybe if Google went with "Pay us $10 per month for us not to show you any AdSense anywhere on the web", this would be successful. In this form, I highly doubt it.
- cJ0th 9y agoSounds a bit like good 'ol protection money, though ("You don't want some malware on your pc, do you?"[0]). A business classic but not exactly what you'd want from a tech company. [0] http://www.businessinsider.de/android-malware-spreads-using-google-adsense-advertising-network-kaspersky-researchers-2016-8?r=US&IR=T http://www.businessinsider.de/android-malware-spreads-using-...
- underyx 9y agoHuh? Do participating sites need to pay to be included? How is this protection money?
- TeMPOraL 9y agoThis is protection money from the user's POV. Protection against malware delivered to user through ads. Particular site that displays the ads is utterly irrelevant here.
- cJ0th 9y agoMy comment, as TeMPOraL points out, was looking at it from the user's perspective and it was a little tongue in cheek. However, google certainly is aware that its AdSense service has been used to spread malware (see my link above)
- majewsky 9y agoGoogle is the one ad network I'd expect to at least make an effort to scan for and filter malware-infested ads, for one reason: They're a household name and they have other products that actual consumers use. If there were a headline tomorrow that some random ad network distributed malware onto consumer's computers, everyone would say "never heard of them before" and move on. If the headline were "Google spreads malware onto consumer's computers", it's reasonable to expect that at least a few people would get mad (such as those affected by the malware) and stop using some other Google product(s). So that's a risk that Google has to consider when asking whether malware scanning is a justified expense. Of course, this doesn't take into account the follow-up question whether malware scanning at the ad-network level (or anywhere, really) offers any sort of protection. (It doesn't appear to be effective, as evidenced by your link.) I, for one, have not whitelisted Google ads (or anything else) in any of my ad/tracking/malware blockers.
- lightbyte 9y ago>Google is the one ad network I'd expect to at least make an effort to scan for and filter malware-infested ads, for one reason: They're a household name and they have other products that actual consumers use. They have already served up malware from ads: https://www.theverge.com/2014/9/19/6537511/google-ad-network-exposed-millions-of-computers-to-malware https://www.theverge.com/2014/9/19/6537511/google-ad-network...
- majewsky 9y agoYes, I acknowledged that further down.
- piyush_soni 9y ago> Maybe if Google went with "Pay us $10 per month for us not to show you any AdSense anywhere on the web", this would be successful And more importantly, with the guarantee of "no tracking whatsoever" (rather than just not 'showing' ads). Then, some of my friends would start trusting Google again (and are already willing to pay for something like that).
- arjie 9y agoHow are they going to show you no ads if they don't know it's you? They have to track you for it to work.
- majewsky 9y agoI think GP means that you're signed in with Google, so you have a cookie linking your browser to your account, but Google does not do anything with the metadata from the requests that include the cookie of a paying contributor.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- piyush_soni 9y agoThey already have my sign in information. When I say no tracking, I mean nothing other than that. Like what I search, which sites I go to, which videos I watch on YouTube, or mining my photographs for more advertising hints, and what not.
- arjie 9y agoSo, if I'm a publisher, I have a deal with Google to pay me for space on my website. You want to pay Google in such a way that they don't know you're visiting my website. Your payment to Google must make sure there are no ads on my website for you. So now Google can't pay me for the space on my website. Why would I even sign up with Google if they aren't going to pay me for the space?
- lathiat 9y agoI wish they would launch this; I happily pay $10/month for YouTube Red right now for exactly this.
- josteink 9y ago> I wish they would launch this; I happily pay $10/month for YouTube Red right now for exactly this. And here I wish I could pay for YouTube Red. From what I've heard, YouTube Red users get Google Play Music for free. Ironically, I pay Google more than $10 a month for Google Play Music alone, but they won't let me pay for YouTube Red, even if I want to. Why? God knows. If they're going to be the gatekeepers to paid online content, I'd be furious if they botch that one up too with the same kind of regional discrimination and limitations. And knowing Google though, that's probably exactly what they're going to do. Because that's what they always do.
- brianwawok 9y agoI don't think Google makes the laws around distribution of music. Try talking to the RIAA and friends.
- dingaling 9y agoIt's not a distribution issue - he already listens to the same music through Google Music scubscription as would be provided by Google Red, if it were available. Google Red can still impose territorial restrictions.
- tytso 9y agoIt's not Google Red that is imposing territorial restrictions. After all, Google Red doesn't own the copyright to the music in question, and the copyright owners get to make those decisions.
- Eridrus 9y agoThis is exactly what the first version of contributor was, clearly it was not popular enough to keep around.
- romanovcode 9y agoBecause it is extortion?
- therealdrag0 9y agoI had never heard of it. Wish I had; I've been wanting something like this :(
- fishywang 9y agoThey did that with the previous iteration of Contributor. You can choose your monthly pay, and you'll pay for every AdSense ad on the pages you visited. I chose $2 and I got partial refund every month (probably because on desktop I also have uBlock, so this is mainly for mobile for me), and I got ads replaced by cute cat images. I really liked that Contributor.