this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
491 points (98.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

39784 readers
2138 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I know they allow scam adverts because it's easy money, but why aren't they held responsible for facilitating obvious scams? You open Edge, there's 3 "Earn money quick" adverts. On Instagram, every 5 ads, one is a scam.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 59 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I reported a scam ad to YouTube (it said it was a 1000 dollar giveaway to the first I don't know how many people that signed up). When I googled it the top results were all about how it was a scam. Got feedback a few days later: we don't see a problem, the ad is staying up. So they are even knowingly making the choice to show these scams to their users...

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago

They never gave me feedback on any of the scams I reported - they just removed my ability to report ads at all

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because citizens of many countries are not pressuring their elected officials to change advertising laws such that there is accountability, but companies are most certainly constantly lobbying for relaxed regulations.

It's not often you can look to Brasil for policy guidance, so São Paulo's ban on billboards/outside advertising is pretty remarkable in a number of ways. If they can rid a city of outdoor advertising, surely the world can get a few advertising oversight laws?

The downside is that you can't just throw up your hands and say "Someone else should fix this! Why haven't they?" and walk off. It's a chore that takes time and energy from an already time and energy poor population, and I respect that there is a lot of broken shit in this world that needs fixing.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

One best side effects of that "clean city" law is that building are clean to be used as canvases for artists to paint giant murals on them and now the city is know for its incredible street art.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 years ago

Because they have unfathomably ridiculous amounts of money that they spend on lobbying (read: bribery) so that they stay not responsible.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Because to the tech industry, stuff like "basic accountability", "selling things people actually want", and "developing without limitless free capital" are all considered hate crimes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Nah, the problem OP poses was also a major issue with TV ads, specially the kind of ads with that whole telemarketing, "buy now get 2 free, but wait there's more, we'll throw in these accessories all for" vibe. And radio, and magazines. A lot of snake oil and re-branded stuff was sold through it.

The real reason why accountability isn't given to the platforms is because then the platforms would be less sustainable. And for the older media, that might have been fine still. But not so much the internet, which arguably, barely sustains itself on a gigantic ad-based bubble. It would be a death-throw for 99% of what we build and consume online. We just simply depend on ads THAT much.

I say they should try anyways. Absolutely. I do think the internet could benefit from having a lot more, smaller website, like before. We're even popularizing the concept of interoperability again, like, man, we're posting on Lemmy, a platform made to spread platforms. I think we're closers to kill the ad dependency now than we ever been after the death of usenet.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago

Because they have tons of money for lobbyists and outright buying politicians.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

Forget ads, Microsofts "free trial" wasn't free or a trial. You'd be charged for a product that would show up on your bank statement as free. Short answer; no one in a position of power gives a fuck.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Don't know, i have an ad blocker and so should you.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Trillion dollar company, multibillion dollar company, trillion dollar company

And all 3 of them will point to the 1st amendment as prohibiting the government from regulating speech outside of a few very narrow circumstances.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

One of which is fraud. So yeah, this argument holds no water. The only reason this shit is allowed is money. There's money to be made by allowing it. And money to be lost in preventing it. The end.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Bro every day I open edge at work and the home page is just scammy adverts, ad revenue farming top 10 slides, or garbage about which dog are you.

I do think they should be held to account over what they show on there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

People and corporations with money are above the law.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

They are in the UK, I reported one to ASA and they made them remove it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

I know dungeons who works as a fraud support site a bank. An incredibly high percentage of people getting scammed come from Facebook. Either they believed an ad about investing in crypto (the bank blocks the first transaction automatically and they have to talk to the client), or they have been contacted by.... Zuckerberg, or Elon Musk, who told them they needed investors for an experiment that will be extremely lucrative.... I can't believe people fall for that one.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The websites (or at least Google & Facebook - not sure about Microsoft, it could just be low value ad space that nobody really wants?) you've described are known as "walled gardens" in advertising, meaning the DSP (demand side platform, where people who run ad campaigns manage those campaigns), SSP (supply-side platform, where websites & apps with available add space list that space) and at times the website itself are all part of the same company.

This creates a conflict of interest - essentially DSPs want to place as few ads as reasonable as they only want to advertise to people the ads will have an impact on. SSPs want to show as many ads as possible so they get paid more. This results in walled gardens, like Google & Facebook, showing ads more than they should be resulting in overcharging as a result compared to an optimally run campaign. Many reputable companies and ad agencies are aware of this and so advertise less with the walled gardens, resulting in proportionally higher scam ads, as no agency would run a campaign for them.

There's also the fact that they have no relationships to maintain. If a DSP is constantly showing scam ads in the ad spaces they buy, then they'll get blacklisted by the SSP. Same the other way around if the SSP keeps selling misrepresented ad spaces that will never be seen or will be resold every 5 seconds to the DSP, or otherwise not being a trustworthy partner to work with. As the walled gardens don't need to maintain this relationship and there's no risk of being blacklisted, they can effectively advertise whatever and put ads wherever on their website - they're generally powerful enough that people will use their product anyway, so there's no downside for them to accepting scam ads if they're paying.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Because they have money...

load more comments
view more: next ›