10 ms·

An inside look into the illicit ad industry

211 points by psanford 5y ago

dennisy 5y ago
Is it possible to ensure that your resource is delivered on a specific site? For example if I have an image and need to be 100% certain where it was loaded, is that possible to do with some very high level of certainty?
- waynesonfire 5y ago
  only if you can trust the source and destination, which, from the point of view of the ad server, is not the case hence the uphill battle of ad fraud. this is the value add of closed platforms. though not perfect, they have the most reliable ads. amazon, google, facebook, netflix, pinterest, tv. any fraud just makes these platforms more money so what's the incentive? maybe there are some edge cases with revenue sharing models. the fraud that i can think of on these platfroms is the extent that the quality of platform is misrepresented [1]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2021/02/18/facebook-knew-for-years-ad-reach-estimates-were-based-on-wrong-data-but-blocked-fixes-over-revenue-impact-per-court-filing/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/02/18/facebook-knew-for-years-ad...
gardis 5y ago
I'd really like to see a movie or a documentary on this topic. Comments in here and the post itself are such a niche that only people browsing hacker news get to see.
trasz 5y ago
So what’s illicit about it, compared to the usual ad business?
- mmierz 5y ago
  This is answered in the article!
  - trasz 5y ago
    It’s not. The article simply assumes that actions that the ad networks don’t like are somehow “illicit”, without providing a rationale.
    - yborg 5y ago
      These guys are delivering ads for Lexus to moviepiracy.com by using an intermediate server that obscures the actual target site. Lexus doesn't want its brand associated with these types of sites and would normally prevent this from happening. Intermediary collects the money.
      - mpeg 5y ago
        I know some people that made tons of money simply for setting up the arbitrage, shell companies that would sell ad space to big brands promising top tier media orgs and then turn around and buy it directly from porn, gaming and piracy sites. Same thing as this article, but without actually building the technology themselves, simply being the middleman.
      - Scoundreller 5y ago
        Officially Lexus doesn’t want that, in reality, they care about sales. They’ll be upset if this “gray” traffic doesn’t convert well, but Lexus buyers just might be the type with the disposable income for gambling.
- michael1999 5y ago
  If an advertiser says "place this ad, but not on TPB", and a network says "sure, we'll run your ad, and not on TPB", and then through trickery runs the ad on TPB, but in a way that fools the advertisers auditor, that is clear fraud.
  - PeterisP 5y ago
    Isn't this more like a network says "if you run this ad on your nice-and-fluffy-site, we'll pay you $x" and the nice-and-fluffy-site says "yep, we'll run this ad on our site" but runs this ad on TPB instead ? I.e. as far as I understood the particular situation described by OP, the breach of contract happens between the site and network, not between the network and advertiser.
    - michael1999 5y ago
      The parties to the frauds may be different than I understood. That’s part of good crimeing ;-) I’m not in the trade, and don’t know how people distinguish networks, from resellers, from publishers. The whole world of advertising tends to blur together in a giant ball of mutual fraud from my vantage.
- 123pie123 5y ago
  My assumption was they were displaying ads and falsifying the clicks to the ads and getting money (fraud?)
gjsman-1000 5y ago
[flagged]
- xmodem 5y ago
  Here's an idea: like, capitalism, but with some restraints on it to protect the world. You know, like how we have regulators that (nominally) ensure food safety and clean air and whatnot.
- mikestew 5y ago
  I highly recommend staying away from hemlock tea, despite the fact that I am unable to provide you with an antidote. Just because a solution isn't provided does not necessarily invalidate one's criticism. And China as your poster child for communism? Man, I don't want to get all "no true Scotsman" on you, but...
  - gjsman-1000 5y ago
    I understand - I'm not saying it's not capitalism, but that I don't see from this article why using a different system would prevent this from happening. It's just something to blame.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - elefanten 5y ago
    Your analogy perfectly defeats your point. The alternative to drinking hemlock tea is not drinking hemlock tea. You can't not pick an economic system of organization. Even if you don't pick one, you will have one. So the question becomes "what's the best choice available?" To choose "not capitalism" is still choosing something -- something which may work much worse.
    - mikestew 5y ago
      Thanks, Neil Peart?[0] I'm not saying "don't choose", or "choose differently". I'm saying one doesn't need to offer alternatives in order to state that $THING might have downsides. Just because I have a lot of money tied up in the U. S. stock market doesn't mean that it's hypocritical to point out the jackassery that can come with capitalism...like ad tech. [0] https://www.rush.com/songs/freewill https://www.rush.com/songs/freewill
ryandrake 5y ago
Fascinating article to a layman who has no idea what goes on in the bowels AdTech. The scamming and detection cat-and-mouse game seems like such a zero-sum waste of energy/talent/servers/everything, but I suppose while there's opportunity to play these games and shovel money towards oneself, it will keep attracting people. And nobody seems to be losing except ad buyers (monetarily) and end users (via a shittier web experience). I guess my question to the author would be: Once you found out what it really was that you were working on, what did your internal ethical dialog sound like, and how did you justify to yourself continuing to work on it?
- Dlanv 5y ago
  A big portion of the world consists of cat and mouse games like this. Everything 'security' in the world is the same way.
  - RedBeetDeadpool 5y ago
    I remember reading somewhere that a lot of our dna is pretty much this 'security' you speak of.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      I'd like to see the pull requests please
      - andrewflnr 5y ago
        You can get diffs, but the documentation is going to be sparse.
      - TeMPOraL 5y ago
        This was a while ago, but: https://github.com/msporny/dna/pulls https://github.com/msporny/dna/pulls.
  - wyager 5y ago
    Not everything. Formal methods research, for example, is not cat-and-mouse.
hiccuphippo 5y ago
It sounds like a lot of this could be prevented if Javascript had a way to disallow monkeypatching. Maybe there could be something like `const` that would prevent external code from modifying an attribute of an object. At least for objects provided by the engine itself. Is there any non malicious reason to allow everyone to replace `window.encodeURIComponent`?
- moron4hire 5y ago
  Well, window is the default global scope, so it can't be sealed or any top-level declarations wouldn't work. You'd have to create a new global scope to be able to seal window, and that would break large swaths of the web.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    >and that would break large swaths of the web. I'm thinking that might not be as bad of a thing as you might be making it out as. Sometimes, you just need to light a match and watch certain things burn. Allow their ashes to be fertilizer for the regrowth period. Unfortunately, in the world of today, I think the underworld of slimey devs would fill the void faster, and implement "new" that appeals to their needs.
    - moron4hire 5y ago
      And what of all those government websites that don't get updated very often, with forms that people rely on to get access to benefits? Something as simple as client-side pre-form-validation would break access and it could be months before anyone does anything about it. Sure, you could argue that the various government bureaus should be better about updating stuff, but that's really just not going to happen.
      - eitland 5y ago
        I've been proposing the same approach as Mozilla took with asm a few years ago: Specify a subset of the language and guarantee that if on sticks to this subset it will run in a simplified and heavily optimized branch of the code.
jklinger410 5y ago
Like many takedowns of the digital ad industry, this paints an incomplete picture. We use 3rd party impression and click tracking, along with pairing purchases to user/session ids to make sure our ads our working. If a user tries to mask their data from us, they simply come in as direct traffic, and we don't attribute that to our ad campaign. If this fraud stuff trips you up you aren't doing it right.
- cbsmith 5y ago
  Yup, but that's the thing: "you aren't doing it right" is more the norm than otherwise.
- ohyeshedid 5y ago
  >If this fraud stuff trips you up you aren't doing it right. That mentality, across the entire ad industry, is how I retired before 40. Assumptions of security, understanding, and operating knowledge create huge blindspots, and those were my flow state.
  - jklinger410 5y ago
    I tend to agree but this article doesn't address the blindspots that I think are relevant.
- bentice 5y ago
  Most of the ad industry believes that because they use a 3rd party impression or click tracking they are safe from these attacks. This article outlines how ad fraud operations find vulnerabilities in those technologies that the ad industry trusts. 3rd party verification does not mean you have avoided fraud.
  - jklinger410 5y ago
    I didn't just leave it at impression and click tracking though.
    - 5y ago
secondcoming 5y ago
What I don't understand about domain masking is how the offender gets paid? Surely the owner of the 'borrowed' domain gets paid instead?
- gowld 5y ago
  Advertiser buys ads (via a network intermediary) on "Good sites, but not Pirate Bay" Evil person creates a (simple, weak) good site, and sells ads on it. Advertiser pays Evil person to show ads on simple, weak, good site. Evil person then displays those ads (via iframe) on Pirate Bay. Advertiser thinks the end-user visited Good site.
  - vzqx 5y ago
    How does Evil person interact with Pirate Bay owners? Does the Pirate Bay knowingly host fraudulent ads in return for a share of the profit?
    - andrewla 5y ago
      The "Evil person" and the "Pirate Bay owners" are the same people. The ads are not fraudulent per se -- real humans are seeing the ads and interacting with them.
comprev 5y ago
Another industry which often flies under the radar of many people is the marketplace for products which eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Amazon, PayPal, Stripe, etc. will not touch. The market for [non-FDA] diet pills, MLM eBooks, "mind, body & soul" empowerment videos, etc. is massive - even more so during the pandemic when employees are getting bored at home. A business I knew with saw revenue rocket during the last 2 years, and they owned the whole stack - affiliate marketing schemes, an ecommerce platform (which still supports IE7!), virtual call-centres, right down to a payment processor (that also accepted adult content, CBD products, etc.). The experience really opened my eyes into how much money there is to be made by... how can I put this politely.... exploiting overweight gulliable people with low self-esteem.
ChuckMcM 5y ago
That is a very accurate description of the 'ad tech' business we got to interact with at Blekko. Greed caught many of the folks, they would be making $2K - $4K a week and suddenly jump to $15-$20K ? And all the anti-fraud algorithms would light up. I don't doubt for a moment that the small numbers were also fraud but until they crossed the threshold they got away with it. The CFO and I were convinced that everyone would switch to "CPA" or per-action models (you only pay on the ad if the click resulted in a sale/conversion etc) that seemed like a much harder thing to defraud. But for brand impressions? That isn't something you can do easily. Our crawler uncovered a registrar that had sold thousands of domains on one of the odd top levels to a scammer who had populated them with duplicate data driven "forum", "blog" and "review" sites. At the time the crawler would flag sites with identical copy and this person had been fairly clever in that they clearly had a crawler of their own and they crawled through forums and just duplicated all of the messages and then populated their "fake" forum with them (as an example). If you looked at one "page" it kind of made sense (it clearly was written by a human) but different responses were talking about randomly different things (likes one post on cats and then a post on rebuilding an engine). We speculated it had started as a black hat SEO operation and then expanded into an ad fraud farm. But still it was amazing to see what was perhaps hundreds of thousands of "web pages" that existed simply to exploit a way to extract money out the web ecosystem.
- BiteCode_dev 5y ago
  The opposite is true: ad companies will often not count all the legit impressions, until you start putting monitoring and call them out. Ads are just a dirty business at this point.
  - Beltiras 5y ago
    Has it ever not been?
    - BiteCode_dev 5y ago
      If you read the excellent Bernays' propaganda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book)), you can have dive into how advertising was perceived in 1920. While I don't buy that this is the only view at the time, and that there was no dirt to find, I believe that there was a time were ads were imagined as a way to inform the consumers, or at least convey some kind of information to them. Unfortunately, the market doesn't optimize for what's right, only for what's profitable. The too may or may not aligned at first, but give it enough time, and it will deviate.
soared 5y ago
> ad tech is about trying to scam the rest of ad tech as hard as possible, while trying to not get scammed too hard yourself That’s a joke of a quote. You could say that about literally any industry and it would never be true. If a company solely exists to scam others, over the long term it will not last. Adtech provides digital marketing which drives actual revenue and profits for businesses. There certainly are scammers, but this quote just ignores an entire legitimate industry.
paulpauper 5y ago
I remember seeing a pop-under script as late as 2013 that could bypass chrome popup blockers
bentice 5y ago
The only way to really solve this is to follow the money. There will always be vulnerabilities but whether it's profitable to exploit them is another story. Ads move fast but money moves slow. The victims are good publishers ( miss out on ad dollars that would have gone their way) and advertisers (who have generally moved their money to walled gardens where there isn't an agency incentive problem).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wly_cdgr 5y ago
I would literally rather be working at Chipotle for minimum wage than doing the work described in this article

211 points by psanford 5y ago

Is it possible to ensure that your resource is delivered on a specific site? For example if I have an image and need to be 100% certain where it was loaded, is that possible to do with some very high level of certainty?

waynesonfire 5y ago
only if you can trust the source and destination, which, from the point of view of the ad server, is not the case hence the uphill battle of ad fraud. this is the value add of closed platforms. though not perfect, they have the most reliable ads. amazon, google, facebook, netflix, pinterest, tv. any fraud just makes these platforms more money so what's the incentive? maybe there are some edge cases with revenue sharing models. the fraud that i can think of on these platfroms is the extent that the quality of platform is misrepresented [1]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2021/02/18/facebook-knew-for-years-ad-reach-estimates-were-based-on-wrong-data-but-blocked-fixes-over-revenue-impact-per-court-filing/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/02/18/facebook-knew-for-years-ad...

gardis 5y ago

I'd really like to see a movie or a documentary on this topic. Comments in here and the post itself are such a niche that only people browsing hacker news get to see.

trasz 5y ago

So what’s illicit about it, compared to the usual ad business?

mmierz 5y ago
This is answered in the article!
- trasz 5y ago
  It’s not. The article simply assumes that actions that the ad networks don’t like are somehow “illicit”, without providing a rationale.
  - yborg 5y ago
    These guys are delivering ads for Lexus to moviepiracy.com by using an intermediate server that obscures the actual target site. Lexus doesn't want its brand associated with these types of sites and would normally prevent this from happening. Intermediary collects the money.
    - mpeg 5y ago
      I know some people that made tons of money simply for setting up the arbitrage, shell companies that would sell ad space to big brands promising top tier media orgs and then turn around and buy it directly from porn, gaming and piracy sites. Same thing as this article, but without actually building the technology themselves, simply being the middleman.
    - Scoundreller 5y ago
      Officially Lexus doesn’t want that, in reality, they care about sales. They’ll be upset if this “gray” traffic doesn’t convert well, but Lexus buyers just might be the type with the disposable income for gambling.
michael1999 5y ago
If an advertiser says "place this ad, but not on TPB", and a network says "sure, we'll run your ad, and not on TPB", and then through trickery runs the ad on TPB, but in a way that fools the advertisers auditor, that is clear fraud.
- PeterisP 5y ago
  Isn't this more like a network says "if you run this ad on your nice-and-fluffy-site, we'll pay you $x" and the nice-and-fluffy-site says "yep, we'll run this ad on our site" but runs this ad on TPB instead ? I.e. as far as I understood the particular situation described by OP, the breach of contract happens between the site and network, not between the network and advertiser.
  - michael1999 5y ago
    The parties to the frauds may be different than I understood. That’s part of good crimeing ;-) I’m not in the trade, and don’t know how people distinguish networks, from resellers, from publishers. The whole world of advertising tends to blur together in a giant ball of mutual fraud from my vantage.
123pie123 5y ago
My assumption was they were displaying ads and falsifying the clicks to the ads and getting money (fraud?)

gjsman-1000 5y ago

[flagged]

xmodem 5y ago
Here's an idea: like, capitalism, but with some restraints on it to protect the world. You know, like how we have regulators that (nominally) ensure food safety and clean air and whatnot.
mikestew 5y ago
I highly recommend staying away from hemlock tea, despite the fact that I am unable to provide you with an antidote. Just because a solution isn't provided does not necessarily invalidate one's criticism. And China as your poster child for communism? Man, I don't want to get all "no true Scotsman" on you, but...
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  I understand - I'm not saying it's not capitalism, but that I don't see from this article why using a different system would prevent this from happening. It's just something to blame.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- elefanten 5y ago
  Your analogy perfectly defeats your point. The alternative to drinking hemlock tea is not drinking hemlock tea. You can't not pick an economic system of organization. Even if you don't pick one, you will have one. So the question becomes "what's the best choice available?" To choose "not capitalism" is still choosing something -- something which may work much worse.
  - mikestew 5y ago
    Thanks, Neil Peart?[0] I'm not saying "don't choose", or "choose differently". I'm saying one doesn't need to offer alternatives in order to state that $THING might have downsides. Just because I have a lot of money tied up in the U. S. stock market doesn't mean that it's hypocritical to point out the jackassery that can come with capitalism...like ad tech. [0] https://www.rush.com/songs/freewill https://www.rush.com/songs/freewill

ryandrake 5y ago

Fascinating article to a layman who has no idea what goes on in the bowels AdTech. The scamming and detection cat-and-mouse game seems like such a zero-sum waste of energy/talent/servers/everything, but I suppose while there's opportunity to play these games and shovel money towards oneself, it will keep attracting people. And nobody seems to be losing except ad buyers (monetarily) and end users (via a shittier web experience). I guess my question to the author would be: Once you found out what it really was that you were working on, what did your internal ethical dialog sound like, and how did you justify to yourself continuing to work on it?

Dlanv 5y ago
A big portion of the world consists of cat and mouse games like this. Everything 'security' in the world is the same way.
- RedBeetDeadpool 5y ago
  I remember reading somewhere that a lot of our dna is pretty much this 'security' you speak of.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    I'd like to see the pull requests please
    - andrewflnr 5y ago
      You can get diffs, but the documentation is going to be sparse.
    - TeMPOraL 5y ago
      This was a while ago, but: https://github.com/msporny/dna/pulls https://github.com/msporny/dna/pulls.
- wyager 5y ago
  Not everything. Formal methods research, for example, is not cat-and-mouse.

hiccuphippo 5y ago

It sounds like a lot of this could be prevented if Javascript had a way to disallow monkeypatching. Maybe there could be something like `const` that would prevent external code from modifying an attribute of an object. At least for objects provided by the engine itself. Is there any non malicious reason to allow everyone to replace `window.encodeURIComponent`?

moron4hire 5y ago
Well, window is the default global scope, so it can't be sealed or any top-level declarations wouldn't work. You'd have to create a new global scope to be able to seal window, and that would break large swaths of the web.
- dylan604 5y ago
  >and that would break large swaths of the web. I'm thinking that might not be as bad of a thing as you might be making it out as. Sometimes, you just need to light a match and watch certain things burn. Allow their ashes to be fertilizer for the regrowth period. Unfortunately, in the world of today, I think the underworld of slimey devs would fill the void faster, and implement "new" that appeals to their needs.
  - moron4hire 5y ago
    And what of all those government websites that don't get updated very often, with forms that people rely on to get access to benefits? Something as simple as client-side pre-form-validation would break access and it could be months before anyone does anything about it. Sure, you could argue that the various government bureaus should be better about updating stuff, but that's really just not going to happen.
    - eitland 5y ago
      I've been proposing the same approach as Mozilla took with asm a few years ago: Specify a subset of the language and guarantee that if on sticks to this subset it will run in a simplified and heavily optimized branch of the code.

jklinger410 5y ago

Like many takedowns of the digital ad industry, this paints an incomplete picture. We use 3rd party impression and click tracking, along with pairing purchases to user/session ids to make sure our ads our working. If a user tries to mask their data from us, they simply come in as direct traffic, and we don't attribute that to our ad campaign. If this fraud stuff trips you up you aren't doing it right.

cbsmith 5y ago
Yup, but that's the thing: "you aren't doing it right" is more the norm than otherwise.
ohyeshedid 5y ago
>If this fraud stuff trips you up you aren't doing it right. That mentality, across the entire ad industry, is how I retired before 40. Assumptions of security, understanding, and operating knowledge create huge blindspots, and those were my flow state.
- jklinger410 5y ago
  I tend to agree but this article doesn't address the blindspots that I think are relevant.
bentice 5y ago
Most of the ad industry believes that because they use a 3rd party impression or click tracking they are safe from these attacks. This article outlines how ad fraud operations find vulnerabilities in those technologies that the ad industry trusts. 3rd party verification does not mean you have avoided fraud.
- jklinger410 5y ago
  I didn't just leave it at impression and click tracking though.
  - 5y ago

secondcoming 5y ago

What I don't understand about domain masking is how the offender gets paid? Surely the owner of the 'borrowed' domain gets paid instead?

gowld 5y ago
Advertiser buys ads (via a network intermediary) on "Good sites, but not Pirate Bay" Evil person creates a (simple, weak) good site, and sells ads on it. Advertiser pays Evil person to show ads on simple, weak, good site. Evil person then displays those ads (via iframe) on Pirate Bay. Advertiser thinks the end-user visited Good site.
- vzqx 5y ago
  How does Evil person interact with Pirate Bay owners? Does the Pirate Bay knowingly host fraudulent ads in return for a share of the profit?
  - andrewla 5y ago
    The "Evil person" and the "Pirate Bay owners" are the same people. The ads are not fraudulent per se -- real humans are seeing the ads and interacting with them.

comprev 5y ago

Another industry which often flies under the radar of many people is the marketplace for products which eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Amazon, PayPal, Stripe, etc. will not touch. The market for [non-FDA] diet pills, MLM eBooks, "mind, body & soul" empowerment videos, etc. is massive - even more so during the pandemic when employees are getting bored at home. A business I knew with saw revenue rocket during the last 2 years, and they owned the whole stack - affiliate marketing schemes, an ecommerce platform (which still supports IE7!), virtual call-centres, right down to a payment processor (that also accepted adult content, CBD products, etc.). The experience really opened my eyes into how much money there is to be made by... how can I put this politely.... exploiting overweight gulliable people with low self-esteem.

ChuckMcM 5y ago

That is a very accurate description of the 'ad tech' business we got to interact with at Blekko. Greed caught many of the folks, they would be making $2K - $4K a week and suddenly jump to $15-$20K ? And all the anti-fraud algorithms would light up. I don't doubt for a moment that the small numbers were also fraud but until they crossed the threshold they got away with it. The CFO and I were convinced that everyone would switch to "CPA" or per-action models (you only pay on the ad if the click resulted in a sale/conversion etc) that seemed like a much harder thing to defraud. But for brand impressions? That isn't something you can do easily. Our crawler uncovered a registrar that had sold thousands of domains on one of the odd top levels to a scammer who had populated them with duplicate data driven "forum", "blog" and "review" sites. At the time the crawler would flag sites with identical copy and this person had been fairly clever in that they clearly had a crawler of their own and they crawled through forums and just duplicated all of the messages and then populated their "fake" forum with them (as an example). If you looked at one "page" it kind of made sense (it clearly was written by a human) but different responses were talking about randomly different things (likes one post on cats and then a post on rebuilding an engine). We speculated it had started as a black hat SEO operation and then expanded into an ad fraud farm. But still it was amazing to see what was perhaps hundreds of thousands of "web pages" that existed simply to exploit a way to extract money out the web ecosystem.

BiteCode_dev 5y ago
The opposite is true: ad companies will often not count all the legit impressions, until you start putting monitoring and call them out. Ads are just a dirty business at this point.
- Beltiras 5y ago
  Has it ever not been?
  - BiteCode_dev 5y ago
    If you read the excellent Bernays' propaganda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book)), you can have dive into how advertising was perceived in 1920. While I don't buy that this is the only view at the time, and that there was no dirt to find, I believe that there was a time were ads were imagined as a way to inform the consumers, or at least convey some kind of information to them. Unfortunately, the market doesn't optimize for what's right, only for what's profitable. The too may or may not aligned at first, but give it enough time, and it will deviate.

soared 5y ago

> ad tech is about trying to scam the rest of ad tech as hard as possible, while trying to not get scammed too hard yourself That’s a joke of a quote. You could say that about literally any industry and it would never be true. If a company solely exists to scam others, over the long term it will not last. Adtech provides digital marketing which drives actual revenue and profits for businesses. There certainly are scammers, but this quote just ignores an entire legitimate industry.

paulpauper 5y ago

I remember seeing a pop-under script as late as 2013 that could bypass chrome popup blockers

bentice 5y ago

The only way to really solve this is to follow the money. There will always be vulnerabilities but whether it's profitable to exploit them is another story. Ads move fast but money moves slow. The victims are good publishers ( miss out on ad dollars that would have gone their way) and advertisers (who have generally moved their money to walled gardens where there isn't an agency incentive problem).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wly_cdgr 5y ago

I would literally rather be working at Chipotle for minimum wage than doing the work described in this article