4 ms·

>The representative adds that "most fraudsters are only interested in trying to manipulate the rankings of real businesses", so the "distinction between attempt

>The representative adds that "most fraudsters are only interested in trying to manipulate the rankings of real businesses", so the "distinction between attempted fraud by a real business, as opposed to attempted fraud for a non-existent business, is important". To catch these people out, TripAdvisor uses "state-of-the-art technology to identify suspicious review patterns" and says, "Our community too can report suspicious activity to us." They then quote a 2015 study that found "93 percent of TripAdvisor users said they find the reviews they read to be accurate of the actual experience". If TripAdvisor can't catch out a restaurant which is entirely a farce how can they pretend they're catching out real businesses who might be nudging their results up a bit?

ivanbakel 9y ago
There could be a difference between a human-manipulated restaurant which still has some real business and a totally fake restaurant which can be manipulated however you like. Thinking along the lines of something I read on HN recently, using Benford's Law[1] to catch fraud in accounting data - the essential principle is that fraudsters are constrained by some unmassagable numbers, like the monthy total or some important transactions, so the figures they do change end up altering the overall distribution in some unrealistic way. But if you can generate your own dataset (and make sure it follows Bendford's), that fraud marker disappears. TripAdvisor might be able to detect when your restaurant is behaving very different to how it's expected to, based on some past or present data - but there's less indication something has gone wrong if you just create a new restaurant out of thin air that behaves totally consistently. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  Or their fraud detection is just not very good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor
  - ivanbakel 9y ago
    But the question wasn't "why did TripAdvisor not catch this restaurant?", it was "why might a good fraud detection system not catch this restaurant?", because an answer to the second question is required for TripAdvisor to be able to claim that its system is any good.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      > because an answer to the second question is required for TripAdvisor to be able to claim that its system is any good Not really, the expectation of any sort of honesty in public communications, be it from the government, corporations, or individuals, is a thing of the past.
      - pixl97 9y ago
        >is a thing of the past. No, governments, corporations, and people lied just as much in the past. It's just more transparent to see these days.
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        The “no” isn't warranted, because the grandparent didn't say honesty which previously existed had eroded, but that the expectation of honesty had eroded. Consistent dishonesty with that becoming more transparent is one explanation of that observed effect, not a refutation of it.
        mistermann 9y ago
        I'd also disagree quite vigorously that dishonesty is perfectly constant over the last 50 years as well. You don't have to go that far back to find a time where most politicians were generally concerned with the welfare of citizens, above all other things. Now, for whatever reason, that seems to be a secondary (at best) goal on both sides of the aisle.
dawnerd 9y ago
That’s why I just go right to the negative reviews. Usually points out right away if the place is as it seems. Really helpful when booking hotels.
- jonny_eh 9y ago
  You mean the negative reviews created by the competition?
  - jdavis703 9y ago
    Is that really a thing? Like you I also try to read the negative reviews. If they're for dumb complaints like "the waiter had an attitude" or "the food took too long to arrive" I ignore them. It's only when I see more serious problems arising in a pattern that I'll discount the restaurant.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > Is that really a thing? Yes, businesses creating (or paying others to create) negative reviews of competitors on online sites is a thing.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      Yup. This applies for every popular site with reviews. For other funny things with reviews, I have some experience with Polish eBay/Amazon equivalent, Allegro. The following things are regular occurrences there: - Employees of a seller creating fake accounts (and/or asking their friends and family to do this) and "buying" things with payment on delivery in order to leave 5-star reviews and positive comments. The things obviously never get sent, so it costs only as much as Allegro bills the seller per item sold. - Clueless people leaving negative reviews because they're clueless. Like e.g. a seller I know just got a 1-star review on quality and delivery time with a comment that said basically "I got the merchandise and it's fine, but I've been asking you for the invoice for two weeks and didn't get it". The guy bought the product only a week ago, and had the invoice sent twice already. - Sellers fucking up, getting negative reviews, then calling each of the reviewers asking them to delete the negative review, and usually bribing them with discounts or free items. Reviews on Allegro are very high-stakes thing for sellers; just a few negative ones can mean you lose a promoted spot or get your account suspended immediately. Such situations can literally make or break a small business seller. This leads to them reviews gamed to such absurd levels that you basically can't trust them at all, if the seller is a company. Now these are anecdotes for one site only, but given my experience on-line, I'm pretty confident they generalize to anything popular with a review system.
Sylos 9y ago
There is something to be said about people that use TripAdvisor going to a restaurant that exists and then posting non-5-star reviews. Also, TripAdvisor might actually employ undercover test eaters to check the quality of restaurants and those just never managed to book in his fake restaurant for obvious reasons. But yeah, even if it's true what they say, they still also need to prevent fake restaurants from going up the rankings. Otherwise people will do what the author did, push their fake restaurant to the top and then open it up one day. The initial publicity boost will be enough to stay in the spotlight for a long time, especially with people falling for group think and perceiving things there to be a lot better than they actually are, just because other people supposedly thought so.

ivanbakel 9y ago

There could be a difference between a human-manipulated restaurant which still has some real business and a totally fake restaurant which can be manipulated however you like. Thinking along the lines of something I read on HN recently, using Benford's Law[1] to catch fraud in accounting data - the essential principle is that fraudsters are constrained by some unmassagable numbers, like the monthy total or some important transactions, so the figures they do change end up altering the overall distribution in some unrealistic way. But if you can generate your own dataset (and make sure it follows Bendford's), that fraud marker disappears. TripAdvisor might be able to detect when your restaurant is behaving very different to how it's expected to, based on some past or present data - but there's less indication something has gone wrong if you just create a new restaurant out of thin air that behaves totally consistently. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law

tonyedgecombe 9y ago
Or their fraud detection is just not very good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor
- ivanbakel 9y ago
  But the question wasn't "why did TripAdvisor not catch this restaurant?", it was "why might a good fraud detection system not catch this restaurant?", because an answer to the second question is required for TripAdvisor to be able to claim that its system is any good.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    > because an answer to the second question is required for TripAdvisor to be able to claim that its system is any good Not really, the expectation of any sort of honesty in public communications, be it from the government, corporations, or individuals, is a thing of the past.
    - pixl97 9y ago
      >is a thing of the past. No, governments, corporations, and people lied just as much in the past. It's just more transparent to see these days.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        The “no” isn't warranted, because the grandparent didn't say honesty which previously existed had eroded, but that the expectation of honesty had eroded. Consistent dishonesty with that becoming more transparent is one explanation of that observed effect, not a refutation of it.
        mistermann 9y ago
        I'd also disagree quite vigorously that dishonesty is perfectly constant over the last 50 years as well. You don't have to go that far back to find a time where most politicians were generally concerned with the welfare of citizens, above all other things. Now, for whatever reason, that seems to be a secondary (at best) goal on both sides of the aisle.

dawnerd 9y ago

That’s why I just go right to the negative reviews. Usually points out right away if the place is as it seems. Really helpful when booking hotels.

jonny_eh 9y ago
You mean the negative reviews created by the competition?
- jdavis703 9y ago
  Is that really a thing? Like you I also try to read the negative reviews. If they're for dumb complaints like "the waiter had an attitude" or "the food took too long to arrive" I ignore them. It's only when I see more serious problems arising in a pattern that I'll discount the restaurant.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Is that really a thing? Yes, businesses creating (or paying others to create) negative reviews of competitors on online sites is a thing.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Yup. This applies for every popular site with reviews. For other funny things with reviews, I have some experience with Polish eBay/Amazon equivalent, Allegro. The following things are regular occurrences there: - Employees of a seller creating fake accounts (and/or asking their friends and family to do this) and "buying" things with payment on delivery in order to leave 5-star reviews and positive comments. The things obviously never get sent, so it costs only as much as Allegro bills the seller per item sold. - Clueless people leaving negative reviews because they're clueless. Like e.g. a seller I know just got a 1-star review on quality and delivery time with a comment that said basically "I got the merchandise and it's fine, but I've been asking you for the invoice for two weeks and didn't get it". The guy bought the product only a week ago, and had the invoice sent twice already. - Sellers fucking up, getting negative reviews, then calling each of the reviewers asking them to delete the negative review, and usually bribing them with discounts or free items. Reviews on Allegro are very high-stakes thing for sellers; just a few negative ones can mean you lose a promoted spot or get your account suspended immediately. Such situations can literally make or break a small business seller. This leads to them reviews gamed to such absurd levels that you basically can't trust them at all, if the seller is a company. Now these are anecdotes for one site only, but given my experience on-line, I'm pretty confident they generalize to anything popular with a review system.

Sylos 9y ago

There is something to be said about people that use TripAdvisor going to a restaurant that exists and then posting non-5-star reviews. Also, TripAdvisor might actually employ undercover test eaters to check the quality of restaurants and those just never managed to book in his fake restaurant for obvious reasons. But yeah, even if it's true what they say, they still also need to prevent fake restaurants from going up the rankings. Otherwise people will do what the author did, push their fake restaurant to the top and then open it up one day. The initial publicity boost will be enough to stay in the spotlight for a long time, especially with people falling for group think and perceiving things there to be a lot better than they actually are, just because other people supposedly thought so.