Well /g/?

Needs more ad nauseum.

I've thought of switching from Maps for ages. Is Waze good? What about Sygic?

>>62328902
Use OpenMap

ghostery is botnet

>>62328374
I use google search with ublock, it drains them more money. Ghostery would be redundant tho.
>>62328455
dumb tripfag

>>62328374
>google doesn't like nazis and muh freeze peaches

>>62328455
This. but kill yourself tripfag retard wannabe academic

jesus it's called "starter pack" you retard.

>>62328940
>>62328959
>replying and talking to tripfags
dumb anonymouses

Install waze? Guess who owns waze?

>>62328374
>In Firefox install following plugins: uBlockm Ghostery
Change it for AdNauseam.

>>62328374
(also, it pains me to use Google, but DuckDuckGo sucks ass)

>>62328915
I don't find it on FFDroid

File: 1501916698693.jpg (43KB, 393x395px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 393x395px

>>62328374
>waze
>formerly FreeMap Israel
>owned from 2013 by google

>>62328972
It's just too disgusting seeing this pathetic retard every day blogging on /g/. Fucking dumb fuck

>>62329013
OsmAnd~ (Global Mobile Map Viewing & Navigation for Offline and Online OSM Maps) - https://f-droid.org/app/net.osmand.plus

>install duckduckgo app
Someone post the image

>>62328374

THIS IS A FALSE FLAG BY GOOGLE.

DO NOT USE UBLOCK, IS DOESN'T COST GOOGLE MONEY, USE AD NAUSEAM.

>>62329074
damn the all caps make it so convincing

File: Capture.png (243KB, 903x520px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 903x520px

>>62329103
I'm pretty happy with myself.

>>62329074
i went and looked up what adnauseam does and it sounds like you're confused. all it does is randomly click on ads. google and facebook charge for ads on views (in the thousands units) or on clicks.

so let's say i make an ad for my personal site. i tell google that i'll pay them $1 for every person that clicks on the link. they're going to show my ad to ~1000 people if they figure that 0.1% of people in that demographic are interested in the stuff i say my ad is about.

adnauseam short-circuits the process a bit by vacuously clicking on ads, so if google serves an ad to you and you're using adnauseam, it's as though they've made a bet that, it turned out, couldn't possibly lose. they were guaranteed to get a click no matter what they served you, and in turn they were guaranteed to get $1 from me.

what's most likely to happen is that google's AI is going to learn to optimize for sending all of the garbage ads to you because you show up to them as a reliable clicker of ads no matter how shitty they are. ads for face cleansers and stuff will go to young female iphone users or something — some group that's high value — but the ads for amish moving services and geriatric erotic dancers will all get unloaded on you.

in any case, the old strippers and amish movers will pay google for those clicks, and google won't have to work as hard to satisfy those contracts (because who in their right mind would trust people who claim to be amish who use google, or be interested in learning more about old strippers?)

>>62329158
>all it does is randomly click on ads.
False, by default it clicks on all of them.
And because of that, it makes false statistics and Google Ads has to reimburse the companies.

File: Capture.png (138KB, 625x569px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 625x569px

>>62329158
>b-b-but they'll change the algorythm and it won't work after a while!
Not an argument. While it works we will continue, and when it won't, we'll change our tactics too.

>>62329163
okay, fair enough about it clicking on everything. that actually accelerates the process i described, though, so whatever.

but i'm not seeing the bit about reimbursement on the adnauseam site. finances don't seem to show up on that page at all. the whole sell is about confusing google and expressing discontent.

>>62329163
> Google Ads has to reimburse the companies
Yes, but for reimbusement those companies need to pay to Google first.
So, AdNauseam may rather lead to increased Google profits since not every false click will be refunded.

>>62329189
them changing their algorithm isn't even a vague twist on the issue i brought up. i'm really straining myself to imagine how you came up with that interpretation. what exactly did you read that made you think it was about... whatever you're talking about?

File: Screenshot-1504955885.png (31KB, 1011x37px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 1011x37px

>>62328455
Doing my part

>>62329204
>but i'm not seeing the bit about reimbursement on the adnauseam site
They can't really talk about it, it would be a bit akin to fraud.
But it's the effect.

>>62329223
You did good. I use Brave most of the time so no AdNauseam, but I installed it on my other browsers and a few friends' computers.

To say fuck off to adds all you need is:
firefox - uBlock origin, tampermonkey then install anti-adblock script + third party list for uBlock

https://reek.github.io/anti-adblock-killer/

Literally no more ads or annoying turn off your adblock.

>>62328374
This is trash
Here's a new one:

>For Computers
Install Firefox(ESR)
Install uBlock Origin, uMatrix (optional)
Change the search engine to startpage/ixquick

>For Android
Install IceCat/Firefox browser
Install uBlock on firefox
Install DNS66 and/or AdAway
Uninstall Google Maps and install OsmAnd~
Uninstall as many google apps as you can and substitute them from F-Droid

>For iPhone
Ur a fag, (I don't know anything about iOS anymore so just go with what the OP says).

>>62329248
most anti-adblock shit is javascript based making the tampermonkey script seem redundant if you're using ublock, no?

>>62329027
He blogs just because /g/ gives him attention.

>>62329158

Ad nauseam is a direct attack on googles reputation and that's the important point.

You see, if you only block ads, it affects everyone who makes adds. If effectively makes the cake smaller, but everyone still gets the same % of the cake.
Why is this bad? Because Alphabet (Google) is so much above all other online advertisers, that effectively you are harming googles competitors more in the long run.

If you have a low market share and the market shrinks, it might already pushes you out of business since you just can't be anymore competitive. But someone like google could even turn that into an advantage by buying some competitors (who just lost value), they just have more resources, more market power and can afford a price war more easily.


The best way to break alphabets unhealthy market dominance (that will eventually lead to internet censorship), is to attack their reputation.

>>62329266
Not really, you will still get it - do you think I'm suggesting or first of all using it just because it's placebo?

And I haven no problem with javascript I just have a problem with tracking.

Widgets in Gnome 3 are written in javascript does that mean you will stop using gnome 3 ( assuming you use it ), as a language is used in a lot of places.

It can be used for good or for evil.

And why should I give a shit about demonetizing Google?

I'll stop using Google when they stop providing the best service

>>62329223
this is more like you've netted google 4460.34, and some of it may get reimbursed to the people that paid google.

>>62329226
okay, so it sounds like google has effectively spotted adnauseam users. this can go one of two ways:
1) AN will stay somewhat overt, and google will either fold in those users as part of the probability that they'll get a genuine click (but in the previous example you're not talking about going from 0.1% to 0.09%, because the chances that you in particular would have ever clicked on an ad before were pretty low — the group of people that aren't blocking ads are the ones contributing to that 0.1% rate, not you or me) OR they'll start to learn to stop serving you with ads that sort of "cost them a lot" to show.

2) AN will get better at being covert, to the point that google can't reasonably be expected to police this stuff, and google won't have to field refund requests anymore because there'll be no way to tell the difference between a genuine click and an expertly crafted AN click.

i don't understand how you can understand the basic premise of what AN does and still argue that it does anything but filling google's pockets, albeit in a slightly more speculative way (as now google's not as sure whether the money they've pocketed will have to be reimbursed later).

File: 1489885665212.png (6KB, 253x199px)

6KB, 253x199px

AdNauseum advocates; wouldn't the act of clicking all the add broadcast your presence and destroy your privacy?

>>62328374
>ghostery
>no mention of adnauseam
It's shit

>>62329302
Not only Google's reputation will be harmed dumb Google shill. In fact, I'd be surprised if Google can't detect AdNauseam already, while many competitors can't, harming them even more than regular old blockers do.

>>62329323
If you click everything, you can't be profiled.

Google is afraid, that's why they removed AN from the store.

>>62329337
you can dumb retard, they can see what pages they serve ads to so they can follow you. they only can't follow your ad clicking habits.

>>62329352
install TrackMeNot, it generate fake search queries to create noise.

>>62329345
They only want you to believe they're afraid so you help destroy their competitors. Stop giving your browsing history to Google.

>>62329302
but AN targets all ads, doesn't it? and google is the only entity with the engineering resources necessary to develop tools to identify false clicks like this, to say nothing of being the most reliable company to demand a refund from (a smaller advertising outfit might not have the cushion to make a wave of refund requests survivable).

again, in general AN sounds fine. i'm not an advertising/data mining apologist. but this doesn't sound like it's going to hurt their bottom line in any appreciable way. high barriers to entry on advertising — like the need for mechanisms that guarantee customers are only getting charged for "real clicks" — are exactly the sort of thing that google and microsoft would benefit from.

the idea of confusing google by clicking on things more or less randomly would've been cleverer. if it clicks on everything that just seems easy for google to spot. if they want to break AN, they can do that, but at the very simplest case they can easily take you out of the pool of people from that earlier 0.1% thing.

By default, AN only clicks on ads that DOES NOT respect the "DO NOT TRACK" order.

It's a privacy issue.
If companies catch the fact that if they respect the "do not track", their statistics won't be fucked up anymore, they stop tracking.

It's for the greater good.

>>62329365
They can follow more than your searches, they know where they're sending ads to. Does TMN even load all related resources, or is it easy to detect?

https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
https://noscript.net/

>>62328902
Don't know about waze, but sygic has really good maps (have been using their dedicated navigation app for years).
Also duckduckgo is botnet now as far as I know...

>>62329335
I wouldn't be surprised if Google can ALREADY detect AN users.
It doesn't sound that hard knowing what they're capable of (their access to resources, Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning)//

>>62329372
You can lower the amount of ads AN clicks, down to 10%.

>>62329378
So those who are able to detect AN (with which Google would be or perhaps even is the first) can easily track you without worrying about their stats. Good goy, let Google track you.

>>62329414
That's what I was saying, but maybe I worded it a bit weird, sorry.

>>62328374
>duckduckgo shills

>>62329315

Because google is exactly the opposite of what 4chan stands for.

With google, there is no free speach, there is only wrongthink and right-think (a.k.a. politically correct behaviour, obeying the rules).

>https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6015406?hl=en

Some examples for wrongthink:

"Swear or curse words"
"Slurs relating to race or sexuality, variations and misspellings of profane language"
"Crime scene or accident photos"
"Appearing to profit from a tragic event with no discernible benefit to the victims"
"Content promoting hate groups"
"Content that encourages others to believe that a person or group is inhuman, inferior, or worthy of being hated"


And does so very well:

>http://searchengineland.com/google-flag-upsetting-offensive-content-271119

Not that I care for some stupid stormfags, but the problem is that sooner or later this will lead to internet censorship. Think about it: in 20 years, the whole internet might be like reddit..

>>62329427
Np, you said:
>I'd be surprised if google ...
I guess what you meant to say was:
>I wouldn't be surprised if google ...

>>62329378
in this scenario, who's not following DNT orders, and how are they motivated to follow them?

if it's anonymous-weblog.com and they host google ads, if anonymous-weblog.com is ignoring my DNT requests they're not really in the feedback loop to be motivated to respect DNT requests. the soonest you would see that pressure would be if google went and inspected the sites on which their ads were being shown, then contacted those customers to tell them that their ads are garbage and won't be improved until they start respecting DNT requests.

but that seems like an obtusely roundabout way to get satisfaction. for one thing, google could/should just prioritize search results from domains that respect the DNT header request. obviously, since they don't, it doesn't seem super likely that google will do the strong-arm thing with shitty ads. what seems more likely is that google will say something like "hey, ads have been junk lately, we're fixing it so that adnauseam users don't affect things anymore. look forward to that in the coming days"

>>62329415
>You can lower the amount of ads AN clicks, down to 10%.
that addresses the last paragraph i guess. still leaves the rest of the issues i brought up

>>62329439
>>62329427
Wait whoops I'm retarded sorry. I didn't read your OP properly.

>>62328374
> The "stroking the ego of triggered little snowflakes who larp as natzees on the internet" starter pack.
> Can't go through life without trying to demonetize everyone they disagree with.
Remember when the point of boycotting Google was that it isn't trustworthy with your data as it is a catch all for your identity online? Sad.

>>62329335
>>62329372

But that's the point!

Only blocking ads doesn't really affect google (like I already said). In other words: it affects everyone who does add the same.

But what makes google different? Why do people keep throwing their dollars at google? Because google is "big and trustworthy".

The argument "but google is technologically better, so you harm others more" is nonsense and google shilling. The only consequence would be "oh, leave google alone, we cant do anything anyway"... Google shilling at it's finest.


I'll say it one more time for you retards:
The point is, when google ads become unreliable, the trust is getting harmed. people might consider other advertisers (if it's only a small group of people seeing my ad anyway, why pay google's high prices when someone else does it cheaper?). Other people might consider other ad channels. Think about companies that do internet advertising AND other channels, they would benefit from that.


Long story short:
We have to do something.
Ad nausem seems to piss off google a lot (they already banned it from chromium) and that is a good sign. So keep on using it. It won't bring google down, but it's important to play your part, even if it's only a small part in the bigger picture.

>>62329534
>when google ads become unreliable
which they won't, because google is good at algorithms, they might even already have made one to detect adnau.
>seems to piss off Google a lot
what if that's what you to believe so they can track you everywhere they injected their garbage botnet ads.
fuck off dumb google botnet shill, adnau only harms small advertisers, mostly those that don't respect DNT (which they should but still)

>Android
>Install a search engine that sells your shit
>Install malware browser
>Install a random Google Maps alternative
This isn't gonna do shit, how about
>Install a custom ROM without GApps/remove GApps from your current one
>Check if sig spoofing works, patch it in if not
>Install microG
>Install F-Droid
>Install Yalp Store

>>62329605
microG and Yalp are suboptimal but your best bet if you can't evade shit that needs those.

>>62329437

Google is a private company that exists to make money, of course they don't offer free speech. Why should they?

Not really sure the point you are trying to make with the adwords policy - they obviously want to attract as many advertisers as they can so that they can make money. Again, this is literally like any other business that generates revenue through advertisements.

Search reults being "censored" is also a non-issue. The fact is that a private company has no obligation to provide free speech, they can run their business any way they want. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Also
>implying you have free speech on 4chan

>>62329534
>use adnauseam
>google algo ids and tracks you wherever you go
It's painfully obvious this is a stunt to make the privacy-aware user trackable again. Just use noscript famalamalam.

>>62328374
>Using cuckcuckno instead of ixquick

>>62328374
>"start pack"
>no ad nauseam

back to the drawing board

>>62328374
>cuckcuckgo

searx ya goof

File: comparison.png (191KB, 3948x1185px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 3948x1185px

>>62329448
>>62329415
actually, i was wrong. a static percentage is insanely stupid. is a floating setting allowed? most users aren't going to be anywhere near 10%, but they will be somewhat stochastic.

look at the left chart. that might be the click through rates for ~15 users from sunday through saturday. something like 0.1% of the ads they see, they click.

now look at the right chart. the cluster at the bottom is the same group, but now there are a few lines at the ~10% rate with some noise. that's what you're telling me is the lowest setting for adnauseam. and this is with some noise thrown in to at least make it not perfectly linear.

this isn't going to confuse google. my hunch is they're only giving people refunds because they got caught trying to pocket the money. only a retard wouldn't notice this kind of pattern, and google is all sorts of shifty and shitty, but they're not idiots.

>>62328374
>cuckcuckgoy
stopped reading there

>>62329534
the whole sell of adnauseam on their site is that it confuses google, and the whole sell on /g/ is that it costs them money. at this point i'm not convinced either is happening, so the "that's the point!" exclamation isn't landing for me.

the rest of your post just calls this stuff nonsense and shilling, which i've been careful not to appear to do. i've said several times now that i think it's reasonable and even admirable to make a statement against google for their aggressive tracking and data mining practices. but i didn't think this was solving any other problem. and the more i think about it, the more i'm concerned that AN will just be *more* confusing to advertising companies that minimize the amount of data mining and tracking that they do. if AN screws with an ethical advertiser's ads, they won't have any of the information necessary to make sense of what's going on. i suppose you can argue that they'll be tapped into this community and know that AN exists, but... that seems wishful.

you close by saying that the long story shorts is that we have to do something. nobody is arguing that point. you're just saying a platitude as if it's synonymous with "we have to do this". i'm not sure what your motivation is, but this seems like an ineffectual attempt toward a number of things.

my CS mentor drilled into me that if you're going to build anything, start by making it do one thing well, then build out if that first thing proves useful. the more we talk the more it sounds like AN is supposed to do half a dozen things varying from making a political statement to confusing google to getting websites to respect DNT headers to costing google money somehow.

what's the one thing this extension is supposed to do well? what purpose is it not leaky at?

>>62328374
>>62328985
google owns waze

>how did google fail?
>literally hundreds of people installed a adblocker into their browser and stopped using a couple of apps.

File: 1476935069880.jpg (64KB, 400x447px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 400x447px

>>62329037
Cannot search by <building number><streetname><city><state>. I kinda need that.

>>62328374
>Waze
Waze is still Google-owned botnet. Didn't you gnow that?

>>62328374
>Ghostery
Redudant if you use uBlock and sells data to advertisers

>>62328374
>duckduckgo
literally just another botnet, go for startpage
>firefox
so you mean google's bitch browser?
>waze
literally google maps with another skin

jesus christ

>>62328374
>Cuckcuckgo
>Ghostery
Nice try schlomo

>my favorite youtubers got b&
>omg i hate google now
This you, OP?

>>62328374
>shillblock, cuckcuckgo, (((ghostery)))
|
|>
|3
|
|

>>62328374
ghostery is a placebo

File: saging this thread with no survivors.jpg (67KB, 624x640px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 624x640px

I'm not a /pol/edditor so I don't care if /pol/ YouTube channels are demonetized.

>>62328455
>needs more placebo autism

>>62333277
>shillblock
No.

>>62328902
osmand

>>62333277
>shillblock
nigger what are you saying

>he doesn't even recommend rooting his android

nu/g/

Stop arguing with /pol/ about their clicker botnet. They don't listen. They hunker down and snipe the infidels as well as friendly medics. Its what makes them invincible as well as completely retarded. They will be their own demise. Just sit back and watch them get fucked over by Google.

>>62328374
>brave