

Massacre Gmail Ads with These Two Sentences (and Some Tragic Words) - divia
http://lifehacker.com/5330642/massacre-gmail-ads-with-these-two-sentences-and-some-tragic-words

======
jnorthrop
The ads help pay for the service. If they are that intrusive choose something
else.

~~~
omouse
I use Thunderbird to check my GMail. Am I freeloader now too?

~~~
Semiapies
Google makes using Thunderbird for your Gmail possible. If they had a check-
off box that said "Show No Ads", there'd be nothing wrong with checking it.
However, that's a wholly different thing than going to lengths to disable the
very unobtrusive ads shown in exchange for using the web client.

------
tortilla
I just don't understand this. I hardly ever see the ads and when I do, they
don't bother me. Why take such extreme measures? If the ads bother someone
that much, why not use a different service or pay for one? Seems to me the
cure is worse than the disease.

~~~
DenisM
It's still a clever hack. Some hacks are beautiful, even if not "profitable".

~~~
Semiapies
Google says they try to avoid serving ads beside tragic emails. So...they put
tragic phrases in emails to avoid ads.

The threshold for the terms "clever" and "hack" must have dropped.

~~~
foulmouthboy
The thing that bothers me most is that Google's obviously trying to be
sensitive in not displaying ads to people who might be in mourning and this
"hack" exploits that. It's like hitting on women at a funeral.

~~~
tilly
"It's like hitting on women at a funeral."

Am I the only person who was reminded of Ryan O'Neil? (For those who don't
know, he accidentally hit on his own daughter at his SO's funeral not long
ago.)

But back to the point, I agree that exploiting Google's desire to be sensitive
is tacky.

~~~
_pius
Actually, I thought of Wedding Crashers. But I digress.

------
mrshoe
I was asked a related question during an interview at Google. As an example,
the interviewer told me of a time their ads drew an especially vile reaction:
they had placed luggage ads on a news story about a serial killer who chopped
up his victims bodies and stuffed them into suitcases.

The interviewer said they'd be happy to just not show any ads on such pages
and asked me how I'd go about detecting them. Apparently they've (mostly)
figured that out by now!

~~~
fretlessjazz
Mod parent up! (slashdot ref).

------
cstefanovici
Embrace the ads people. They pay for all of Google's free services, which
these ad-hating people obviously are using. Also, I find that whenever I
glance at the GMail ads there's always something interesting or amusing there
(more of the latter).

------
helium
Uhm....ever heard of Adblock Plus?

~~~
mziulu
I had the same thought, but this strikes me as a pretty clever "hack"
nevertheless: it exploits a functionality of the service to circumvent the
service itself.

------
sgoranson
On a related topic: what do people think about ad blocking technology from an
ethical viewpoint?

For me, I think I use the same screwy morality that I use when I'm downloading
music...I don't mind stealing from wildly successful artists/businesses, but
I'll gladly pay full price for a CD or click on an ad for someone who's just
trying to pay the bills.

~~~
DarkShikari
_On a related topic: what do people think about ad blocking technology from an
ethical viewpoint?_

I don't think I've clicked an ad since I was first introduced to the internet
at around age ~5 (maybe with a few exceptions for accidental misclicks), and I
don't intend to click on one in the future either. As a result, I am saving
them bandwidth by blocking their ads.

Activating an ad-blocking device is equivalent to stating "I do not intend to
click on your ads," and as a result it cannot possibly be losing the
advertiser money.

(If the site charges per impression instead of per click, that's another
thing, but those are rare these days.)

~~~
lucumo
Cost-per-impression isn't that rare. We have a nice deal that does just that.
In fact that whole network does only cost-per-impression.

But even for cost-per-click views matter. If you have more views, you can get
into better programs.

But most of all, you deprive the site and the advertiser of the opportunity to
make money of off you. If you don't click a specific advertisement: fine. Then
it's the publisher's job or the advertiser's job to find ads that do get them
value out of your visit. If you "opt-out" of ads, they don't have that
opportunity and you've become worthless to them. A freeloader with no
potential of ever being worth something. The site would be better of by
blocking you...

------
teilo
Seems like a waste of time. Enough people do this, and Google will adjust.
It's just cat and mouse from there.

------
chanux
Good for lifehacker readers. I use Gmail for it's simplicity (even with ads).
I won't ever block those non-intrusive text as an honor to the good service.

When I 'm satisfied of your service I won't to give back something. Maybe I
don't have money, but _something_ I can contribute.

~~~
chanux
Oops s/won\'t/want

------
gradschool
First we find out we've been living in a world where most people will give
away their privacy freely because they don't think it's worth anything. Then a
few large companies finding a way to capitalize on it are not just tolerated
but admired. Now one guy treats one of them with the contempt it deserves and
is criticized as unethical or ungenerous. WTF?

------
fretlessjazz
I think most of us are missing the point. The author is not implying that he
discovered a "hack" or "secret code", it's that Google consciously chooses to
not match advertisements to text such as this. You can rephrase the sentences
all you'd like, and Google will still not render ads.

------
thuc
i agree, i don't find the sidebar ads to be obtrusive. i don't even notice
them. i do notice the ad above the email contents on occasion and they've been
pretty useful to me.

------
clay
A better hack might be to do the tragic words in a different language, like
chinese.

------
_pius
I upvoted this so I'd remember to take a look later. Now I kinda wish I
hadn't.

------
Torn
Google allows you to turn the ads off.. so why the need for this 'hack'?

Go to _Settings - > Web Clips_ and untick 'Show my web clips above the Inbox'.

------
paul9290
I ignore them, but the links to interesting stories from sites of my interest
I click on them frequently.

Ads to a blog post I guess those are what you'd call them?!?

