If they were 'reputable' they wouldn't have received kickbacks for linking to drug and cyber crime markets.
>>According to the Department of Justice, while DeepDotWeb was in operation a total of 23.6 percent of all orders completed on AlphaBay involved DeepDotWeb
Real reputable lol.
I still trust Rtings and love the website, but yeah it's totally possible that at some point they leave out a product because no revenue. I think the hit to their rep would be too big so they wouldn't, but it's always possible.
I think you’re truing to split hairs on what “reputable” means maybe?
Remove that and you will find a new world. But do not remove the "your own moral values" filter.
When I had to do this, I came to some distasteful to me conclusions, eg that two adult siblings should be free to have protected sex. I just didn't see any way to justify not allowing that. Not many people do this.
i dont want to know "ethical people" who have academic beliefs about incest
Why do you want this? "It might help my boss make more money" short-term?
>Some ads even contain malware...
Yeah but what does that have to do with this though? Google isn't getting a kickback from the people running the malware like the 'news website' that was seized was. Google doesn't want malware to be delivered from ads and takes many steps to mitigate it. To compare that to the direct kickback from drug and stolen ID marketplaces is silly IMO.