3 ms·
> I guess the question is whether doing this (injecting yourself into the download flow for an open source piece of software and profiting via ads while doing s
by cbozeman 3y ago
> I guess the question is whether doing this (injecting yourself into the download flow for an open source piece of software and profiting via ads while doing so) is "malicious".
Yes. It's malicious. You're trying to earn money - in this case, ad revenue - on a piece of software with which you have nothing to do whatsoever. It's not only malicious, it's disgusting. I would state how I really feel, but dang would ban me.
- baobabKoodaa 3y ago> Yes. It's malicious. You're trying to earn money ... No, please stop trying to redefine words. That's not what "malicious" means. I agree with you that this website is disgusting and needs to be taken down (as in "down from google") because there's a very real risk that the unscrupulous owners of the website _will eventually serve malicious software_ to juice their profits. But simply serving ads is not what the word "malicious" means.
- birdman3131 3y agoGiven the number of full screen ad's claiming my computer is infected I have ran across just serving ad's is often enough to count as malicious. (Not saying all sites do that but I have seen it often enough.)
- baobabKoodaa 3y agoOk, so Google (the website) is malicious, Youtube (the website) is malicious, Facebook (the website) is malicious. Every single ad infested website in the world is malicious, according to you. Stop trying to change language. That's not what "malicious" means.