| ▲ | sroussey a day ago | |
But they don’t. Google and others do vet ads, but when they don’t host them, the ads can change based on who is looking (clean ads for Google! Not for you!). Google didn’t have this issue until they bought DoubleClick (text ads and they hosted). And they had pretty good privacy as they didn’t want to share shit. After DC it all went to hell. | ||
| ▲ | cwnyth 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
> But they don’t. Google and others do vet ads, but when they don’t host them, the ads can change based on who is looking (clean ads for Google! Not for you!). That sounds like a problem that Google should have already solved. Maybe that's why "Don't Be Evil" got the boot. | ||
| ▲ | anticensor 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
> the ads can change based on who is looking (clean ads for Google! Not for you!). How is that even allowed? | ||
| ▲ | heavenlyblue 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
So they are not hosting the ads? But either way, stuff like hashing content (and only whitelisting hashes which are approved) should solve that. | ||