4 ms·
>To us, your experience on the web is a higher priority than the money that these annoying ads may generate — even for us." That's begs the question - Why were
by ksk 9y ago
>To us, your experience on the web is a higher priority than the money that these annoying ads may generate — even for us."
That's begs the question - Why were those ads approved by Google in the first place? They were the source of the problem to begin with !! Also, before we rush to judgement, how much revenue were those ads generating for Google in the first place? I would respect them a bit more if they actually are taking a hit on this.
>But Google has demonstrated over the years that they're willing to sacrifice their short-term gains to maximize their long-term gains.
How have they demonstrated that? Could you elaborate?
- aembleton 9y agoThey might not be Google ads. A webpage can have both Google ads and dodgy-ad-co ads. If they have the dodgy-ad-co ads then Google will apply the easylist to the page, which will remove the Google ads as well as the dodgy ones.
- panarky 9y ago>> But Google has demonstrated over the years that they're willing to sacrifice their short-term gains to maximize their long-term gains. > How have they demonstrated that? Could you elaborate? Before Google, web search results were rotten. Advertisers could push their sites onto the front page, and paid ads were indistinguishable from organic results. Google's innovation was to deliver pure search results with the highest relevance, with zero influence from advertisers. Ads were separate and labeled as such. By sacrificing near-term ad revenue, Google built trust with users, and won search in the long-term. Other examples: Google could have kept Android closed and charged for licenses. But by open-sourcing it and allowing competitors to use it, they sacrificed short-term license revenue to build a much larger ecosystem. Google capitulated to government demands that they censor search results in China. But then they reversed course, exited mainland China, and sacrificed revenue from that massive market. Long-term, active censorship would damage Google's reputation.
- goatsi 9y ago>Advertisers could push their sites onto the front page, and paid ads were indistinguishable from organic results. >Google's innovation was to deliver pure search results with the highest relevance, with zero influence from advertisers. Ads were separate and labeled as such. Have you tried using Google without an adblocker recently? If I search "buy a car" using Chrome on Android the entire screen of my phone is filled with ads that I need to scroll past to get to the "pure" search results. The only indication that they are ads is a tiny box 1/8 the size of a fingernail. The top result on the embedded Google maps box is also an ad.
- panarky 9y agoYou might want to get your phone checked for malware. I search with Chrome on Android every day, with no ad blockers, and this never happens.
- goatsi 9y agoHere is my Google search experience: https://my.mixtape.moe/gtfvnm.png https://my.mixtape.moe/gtfvnm.png https://my.mixtape.moe/ybfhao.png https://my.mixtape.moe/ybfhao.png Very polite of the malware to put a tiny ad tag on the ads it is managing to inject into a HSTS pinned website on a browser that doesn't allow any addons or extensions. I also like they way they perfect match Google's site design.
- Ajedi32 9y agoMost of the better ads standards have more to do with ad placement than with the ads themselves. It's not particularly easy for Google to reliably detect whether their ads are embedded in a pop-up, for example: https://www.betterads.org/desktop-pop-up-ad/ https://www.betterads.org/desktop-pop-up-ad/