5 ms·

I think you're reading far too much into this. You spoke with a support agent who is checking the status of your AdSense campaign. That system has flagged link

• funshed 5y ago
  It's fair to think "dont be evil" Google would not and it was flagged erroneously. Yet history shows this has been an issue since 2019 and was said to be resolved in 2020. Though apparently not (or it was rolled back). Though to be clear the "not allowed" was a response to the reply that it was links to a Google Analystics Competitor. That may well be down to further training being required but the opportunity was given to clarify and not taken. In the general sense, the intent may not have been malign but the system needs fixing regardless of Google's intent.
  • cerved 5y ago
    I mean you're writing with a chat support agent. Presumably, you're not spending remotely enough money to even be communicating with an agent who is hired by google. Support people are busy, dealing with all kinds of bullshit, with very little time. Frankly I think it's a bit of dick move that you censored your website but didn't bother censoring the guys name.
• callahad 5y ago
  Are they reading too much into it? Of course the support agent has no agency, but it's not like Adam can appeal to a higher authority. Thus, for him, he truly cannot advertise on Google while using Matomo. The effect is real, regardless of whether it was intentional.
  • jsnell 5y ago
    Yes, they clearly are reading too much into it. The title of this thread isn't "Adam cannot advertise on Google while using Matomo". It is making a much more widely scoped claim on multiple axes, which seems to be based purely on this interaction with a support agent.
    • ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      What if it's also Tom, Dick and Harry? How mamy times does it have to happen before its stips being brushed off and starts being takes seriously?
      • jsnell 5y ago
        Edit: the HN title was edited to be more accurate (thanks!), so the criticism below no longer applies. If you're going to make a claim about there being a pattern, like the OP very confidently did in the title, you can't just generalize from one example. There needs to be at least some token effort put into establishing that the pattern is real. Otherwise it's dishonest click-bait. There are dozens, probably hundreds, of different web analytics tools. Are users of those having similar problems, preferably at a meaningful scale? No? Then maybe you shouldn't be implying that there is some kind of a policy against non-GA web analytics software.
      • netizen-936824 5y ago
        Do we have reports from Tom, Dick and Harry that their experience is the same?
        • callahad 5y ago
          Yes. https://forum.matomo.org/t/adwords-campaign-rejected-for-google-matomo-javascript-is-a-malware/35131 https://forum.matomo.org/t/adwords-campaign-rejected-for-goo...
• tylermenezes 5y ago
  This is the same Google that keeps "accidentally" breaking various apps for Firefox, and fixing them several months later? [1] At best I can believe that fixing it was intentionally deprioritized. 1: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has-sabotaged-firefox-for-years/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...
  • objclxt 5y ago
    > At best I can believe that fixing it was intentionally deprioritized. Firefox is (depending how you measure it) 3-7% of the total browser market...if you have a bug that impacts Chrome and a bug that impacts Firefox and have to pick one, it's pretty obvious which one you're going for.
    • Macha 5y ago
      Impact and frequency are both important. The fact that audio of Firefox users is often intelligle in google meet should be higher priority than e.g. a button is misaligned in chrome.
  • sgc 5y ago
    As a FF user, I just presume they have done things right and they are being sabotaged, or at best not even tested, until I can find a bug to the contrary at this point. But they have won even with me to some extent. I have Chromium installed because otherwise I would not be able to do several important tasks a month, due to this technical gaslighting on sites I can't avoid.
  • cerved 5y ago
    This is different because Google makes money from AdSense. Like all of it. The guy is trying to run AdSense campaigns. AdSense runs on what, millions, billions of websites. It has presumably very complicated system for detecting malicious links. An alternative Analytics solution has, at least for OP, been caught in this filter. I don't think it's likely that Google is scheming to sabotage analytics competitors by blocking their customers AdSense campaigns.
• rchaud 5y ago
  Well, if the system flagged it as such, then clearly the fault lies with the user! /s As mentioned in the thread, this is a pre-existing issue going back to 2019. Google had previously claimed to have 'fixed it'. When did software companies become able to routinely explain away their mistakes (or obfuscate their skullduggery) as unintentional mishaps made by their computerized checklists?
  • Bjartr 5y ago
    When customers chose to continue being customers despite those mistakes.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • rchaud 5y ago
      That's why monopoly power is dangerous. The competition isn't strong enough to make having responsibility to one's customers worthwhile.
      • rjzzleep 5y ago
        Are we really going to blame it on the user when these megacorps have huge lobbying campaigns that allows for legislators to turn a blind eye? Monopoly laws are support to prevent exactly that, yet it seems that they are less and less applied to megacorps.
• jlkuester7 5y ago
  > I'm 99% sure this has nothing do with you using a GA alternative. What am I missing here? To me this seems like precisely what is happening. The OP cannot use AdSense because his Matomo integration was flagged as "malicious" (even though presumably using GA to achieve similar functionality would be allowed). Sure, this may not be an official public move by Google to try and stamp out competition, but to the creators and users of stuff like Matomo, that makes little different since the outcome is still the same. The problem is made even worse in this case since you would expect that an (apparent) false-positive in their auto-scan could be cleared up by contacting support. When support's answer is "this is not allowed" it seems like an appropriate time to start talking to lawyers....
  • canadianwriter 5y ago
    Reading too much into it because it's not blocking "Google Analytics competitors" it's blocking that specific one, probably an error with their flagging system. There are plenty of other analytics competitors that run just fine and don't get flagged. This is a support person with no agency, the real problem is this can't really be escalated and fixed - that's the big downfall Google doesn't want to fix because it would be too much work.
    • dhimes 5y ago
      I don't see how fixing a flag would be too much work. What I do see is having to deal with customer support when somebody comes in and says, "Matomo says you are charging me for clicks that I'm not getting." That could turn into a real headache, even in the most honest or best-intentioned cases.
    • jlkuester7 5y ago
      > the real problem is this can't really be escalated and fixed Sure, this is definitely a systemic issue when it comes to these mega-tech-corps. Agreed. But it seems like you are insinuating that Google's AI blocking Matomo is not a "real problem". For the creators/users of Matomo (or whatever the next service is that is "accidentally" flagged) it seems to make little difference if this is an "error with their flagging system". To the AI, a false positive and a true positive are exactly the same. Any AI mistake is a problem. Sometimes it is a small problem that falls within a margin of error. But, when your website is blocked from the literal online ad monopoly that is AdSense for a "false-positive" and support will not help you, that is a real problem. Google does not get a pass here becuase "the [AI] gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it." (Gen 3:12)
• Nicksil 5y ago
  OK, so there are flagged links. What's stopping Google from flagging the links of their competitors?
  • LilBytes 5y ago
    Well, they demonstratabley have.
• bilekas 5y ago
  I am inclined to agree with you, but playing devils advocate, there really isn't anything to stop google from going full crazy and really blocking people. That's the disconcerting thing for me.
  • cerved 5y ago
    Since selling ads is how they make money I don't think there's much need to worry about frivolous blocking
• mpeg 5y ago
  I think the question is what the reason is for flagging these links as malicious, and is there a rule that automatically whitelists Google-owned domains from this blacklisting? Since I imagine what happened is that some heuristics identified the analytics code as malicious and it got blocked, do we also have an example of Google misidentifying their own tracking technology and marking it the same way? If not, I would say that's where the anti-competitive behaviour lies, anything Google automatically becomes whitelisted by their systems while competitors have to be careful and keep checking that they are not incorrectly flagged. PS. I don't actually think the behaviour here is inherently malicious, it's likely a mistake that will be quickly corrected, but it highlights the problems of one company owning the entire ecosystem and the hurdles competitors have to jump through.
  • cerved 5y ago
    It's not a stretch to imagine Google being able to test their own products and how they interact with each other better than others. Which in and of itself may be considered unfair.