Hacker News Reader

Comment by erdii | Hacker News Reader

You mean something like AdNauseam?

Edit: it's an adblocker that is supposed to click on EVERY ad that it blocks.

What GP describes would be stronger than AdNauseum. Instead of sending clicks indiscriminately for every ad, you would send clicks for high quality content.

That'd just end up costing the high quality content providers money. Ads wouldn't just get cheaper for them.

On the contrary, clicking only on trash, and having the high quality content have a much higher signal-to-noise ratio would have the desired effect.

Maybe.

The idea is not so much of clicking on high quality content ads, but sending visits to high quality content pages and click on the ads of those pages, to get them more money. Would obviously stop working if the sales after the ad click are not made.

But, hey this isn't a gameplan, this was just a "what if" :D

That could work, or indeed it could get them dropped quicker because they have a high fraud rate :)

I'm fully on board with the AdNauseam model which fucks about indiscriminately. The ad industry can burn.

Cannot agree more. Since the the advertisers have that much to spend, let's make them to spend more for nothing. Also by doing so, it will literally put enough noise into the data those trackers collect and renders the user profiling useless and effectively protecting us from being tracked.

If we only click ads on high quality contents, those content owner might benefit from it in short term but in long run it most likely going to back fire and make them penalized as for sure there is going to be counter measures. If we simply click every ad indiscriminately, there is no way to tell or they have to penalize everyone which almost equals to do nothing.

> to get them more money

Wouldn’t they just lose money? Ad clicks are not valuable to the businesses themselves. Only to the ad companies.

>That'd just end up costing the high quality content providers money.

I always click on Taboola bitcoin scam links for that exact reason. It's like scambaiting an algorithm.

Plus, low quality content providers would have a high click-through ratio but very low conversion rate.

Might be interesting.

Pretty much all pay per click ads are trash… and I guess most other ads too. No complicated logic needed here!

Last time I checked you could configured click frequency in AdNauseum.

I think it wouldn't be about the ads, but the visit tracking. Like, block GA from seeing your visits on trash sites, but allow when it's a high quality post/content/source, so we skew the numbers for high quality content

That's actually very interesting.

Is there any extension that blocks analytics selectively?

AFAIK, no. You would need to manually add exceptions by domain

Maybe that's where all the invalid clicks came from last year...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com