Slashdot Mirror
Google Upgrades AdSense
An anonymous reader writes "According to a story in the New York Times, Google will now "give advertisers more control over where their ads are shown, how they pay for them and what they look like." Author John Battelle claims "The core philosophy of Google's advertising business is that these ads are actually valuable and useful to users: look for Chevy trucks and get Chevy truck ads. Now we are in another place. It's more about branding and more about advertising other things than what you are looking for, and, cynically, it may be about being a public company that needs revenue growth."" The other thing that other submitters noted was that AdSense would also be accepting graphical advertising as well; but for display on partner sites.
Some registration free links:
Unfortunately, I don't see anything about this on Google's press release page yet.
--
Conversions of Currency Rates of Exchange
Many of you might not like targeted ads ("privacy issues"), but face it --- Google's and Gmail's ads are far less annoying than the random irrelevant banners that, say, Yahoo puts up.
I think that Google's old method of embedding text ads in search result pages was a little bit underhanded. While they were off in another column of the screen, they looked just like regular search results.
Adding graphics to the advertisements seems to be a logical way of extending the power of advertising while at the same time minimizing the confusion of users.
The CPM setting is a tool for advertisers. They can put an upper limit on their campaign cost. This feature does not at all mean that publishers will be paid by impressions.
Well is it? Regardless, Google will lose a major point of differentiation from its competitors and one of the main reasons I use Google. I like unobtrusive ads, perhaps now I will shop around other search engines...
For Internet users, the most visible change will be an expanded use of ads with graphics and animation on many of the Web sites for which Google sells advertising, rather than the short text ads that have been Google's hallmark.
Looks like Adblock's going to be getting a new entry pretty soon.
I've noticed that as of late some searches will return a sponsered link at the top of the page above the results (as opposed to the standard list of sponsered links off to the right of the page).
The first few times I mistook the sponsered link for the top result, although it is labeled as such and has a light blue background (although on my monitor at least the blue is almost indistinguishible from the white background).
How long have they been doing this?
This doesn't happen for all searches either, just some, examples are "yellow pages" "dell" "coffee".
Fortunately it is only a pilot project, so presumably Google hasn't invested that much in it just yet.
I don't think this strategy is going to work, not at all. Google is a technology company. What makes adsense so great is the technology behind it, the code which matches up ads to ad space automatically, with minimal human interaction.
What is google going to try next, changing its search engine so that people can pick what websites to display in the search results?
that these changes make a lot of Sense.
_________
The world doesn't just disappear when you close your eyes, does it?
cynically, it may be about being a public company that needs revenue growth
Everyone raves about, say, Google Maps. I do too. But is it "cynical" for them to move around enough money to actually pay for all that great stuff? Come on, folks, we can't have it both ways. There's nothing "evil" about growing the company. And all of you Google stock holders had better come clean now if your preference is that the stock stays low!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
The other thing that other submitters noted was that AdSense would also be accepting graphical advertising as well; but for display on partner sites.
;-)
I've seen graphical Google ads for a while - I think they were followed by bits of text saying something like 'What do you think of these? We're testing them' or similar.
Of course, I can't for the life of me remember where I saw them - anyone else seen these adverts, or was I imagining them?
I do remember that they were relatively small and non-Flash - and much smaller than the whopping big Google AdSense advert at the top of Slashdot as I type this...
Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
I agree, I have always used Google because their page loads nice and quickly all the time and the results are found quickly. If they do this, they'll become just like every other search engine and I will have to quit using Google. Think of the people on dial up that can't deal with all these animations... This is sad, Google was doing a nice job of dethroning Microsoft.
Adblock googlesyndication.com - no banners for me under any circumstances !
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
...just one calorie, not evil enough.
Power to the Peaceful
I don't know about you, but I've had the option, so far, of accepting graphical AdSense ads or just sticking with text. It's in your account profile.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
...And the behemoth woke from its positive PR slumber...
There was an update to the Google Inc. AdWords Program Terms on April 19th. I can't figure out what changes happened that would reflect this article.
Extreme Adblocking is cool. Uninstalling Flash works well too. Often I have enough of all images and fire up lynx or elinks. The Internet is a hypertext medium, I want text, not flashy graphics or cola ads.
My little Linux and tech blog
I think Google ads are great. They're not too intrusive and they serve out relevant content, unlike many of the banner ad services out there.
As a tech savvy parent, I know only too well how some ad services work. For example, in the course of looking over the logs on my home network's main server, I found that somehow my son had been receiving some very questionable banner ads through some of the sites he frequents. When I confronted him about it, he said he had been downloading "r0mz," which are basically dumps of old video game ROMs that can be played using software emulators. Of course, I talked to him about the ethical issues inherent in using other people's work without paying whatever price they ask for (if any), but that seemed much less serious to me than the content of those ads!
I tell you, the smut they put on those sites -- I couldn't believe it! I would think these webmasters would have the sense not to put that sort of material on sites that presumably only children would be interested in. I can only assume their banner ad provider just doesn't have the kind of targetting technology Google uses.
-- Molly Lipton, Born Again Technologist.
when I was reading this thread, there was a "Google adsense" banner at the top, just kind of funny I thought.
Don't Blame me if I seem bitter, I'm at work, and the TV only plays soap operas.
Note, though, that the report specifies many of the Web sites for which Google sells advertising.
To me, this sounds more like AdSense on external sites than it does search results alongside Google search results.
AdSense has been carrying a limited number of graphical placements for a while -- restricted to JPEGs or non-animated GIFs. And, as a carrier of AdSense ads, I can elect whether or not I want graphical ads to display on my site, either as a site-wide default or on a per-placement basis. The site I manage gets a few graphical ads, but they're always very closely allied to my content. If that changes, then I may consider a move to text-only placements, but I won't be too fussed.
I cant count how many times we have read that Google is tunring evil. Is it some kind of projection on the part of some people, they seem to WANT google to be evil somehow. I just dont understand why.
HTTP/1.1 400
According to TFA, they're allowing graphic ads om their partners sites only, not on google.com. I too will be blocking it, though.
This is quite possibly the worst summary I've ever seen.
Fallacies:
1. This affects AdWords advertisers whose ads are *published* on the AdSense network. Not AdSense publishers. At all.
2. Image creatives have been an option in our AdWords accounts for at least 6 months. You see them on some AdSense publishers already, you just don't know it.
The real news here is the following:
1. Google is *bringing back* (they had it years ago) cost-per-impression advertising. However, this comes with improvements. I won't spam, see references. (R1)
2. Google is going to finally allow AdWords advertisers to decide what content network sites their ads are published on. (R1) Now we can decide NOT to place our ads on shady sites and fall victim to click fraud.
On the real news item #1, this is of huge interest because Google is allowing some "creepage" back to the CPM (cost-per-mil impressions) model. This seems to indicate that they're finally recognizing that click fraud is a *huge* problem. To the tune of it being estimated 15-20% clicks in competitive CPC (cost-per-click) markets on Google might be fraudulent. (R2)
References: (R1) (R2)
I use /etc/hosts to filter ad sites, but I wonder if it's the "best way" of doing it. I have some docens of lines on that file like this:
0.0.0.1 doubleclick.net ad.doubleclick.net ads.mcafee.com 247.vo.llnw.net
0.0.0.1 doubleclick.com m.doubleclick.net m2.doubleclick.net ad.au.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.1 ads.web.aol.com ads.web.de ads.web21.com adserv.newcentury.net
0.0.0.1 adservant.guj.de adservant.mediapoint.de adserver-espnet.sportszone.com
0.0.0.1 advert.heise.de banners.internetextra.com bannerswap.com customad.cnn.com
0.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
which will make browsers fail when they try to show you ads. The list is longer (get it if you're curious)
But this seems a bit "hacky". Is there a better way to do this, is there some project which keeps track of such ad sites, or even ip ranges and allows you to block them easily?
For now, at least, I don't think the search engine is going to be switching. This is talking about Google's Adsense program, which is the text ads it puts on affiliate sites. As an affiliate, one can choose to display text or graphical ads. Some affiliates will switch to the graphical ads, others will remain with the text ads.
Personally I've clicked on a lot more text ads than banner ads, and I think text ads work better. If this is true, then there probably won't be much incentive for any affiliate sites to switch - if they work best with text ads (google certainly does), then they can use text ads, if their content works better with banner ads, then they can use them.
But if banner ads really do get better results, in addition to being annoying as hell, then you might see the price being offered for them reach levels which are hard to ignore. If so, maybe you'll even see google make the switch for its search engine. I doubt any of this will happen, but maybe it will.
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum110/4-1-10.htm
and http://publisher.yahoo.com/
The important thing is not to stop questioning --Albert Einstein.
Google will not allow the increasingly popular formats that include video, sound and interactive elements. And it has restrictions on the animation, to keep ads from repeating endlessly or flashing in a particularly distracting manner.
Hmm. Dunno yet. I'm not unilaterally against all advertising, just irritating advertising. I may not block these ads. We'll see soon, I suppose.
Software Wars
"AdSense would also be accepting graphical advertising as well"
:-)
Are we seeing an AdSense ad graphic on top of the page because, uh.. this is an article on AdSense ad graphics?
What about ads that most will find offensive?
Search for negroes on Google.com and see what ads show up on the right hand side.
I'm a big tall mofo.
The moment Google adds graphical and Flash ads is the moment I will no longer see them.
And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
Image ads have been opt-in since they were introduced. I hope they stay opt-in. For what it's worth, there's also an option to block specific ads although that won't do a lot if all image ads turn into YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY WON seizure beasts.
When someone stands up and declares, "I will never be evil!" you shouldn't be surprised when people start looking for the irony of them being evil.
People love irony.
I believe that Google is generally good but even I have a hard time believing that Google is not evil when I read this one.
I'm a big tall mofo.
Does it come with a license to use my own photos - like read the white balance info f'rinstance?
If not, then I'm not interested.
Sorry, I must be in the wrong decade. Around here everyone just turns ads off. I haven't seen an ad on google, slashdot, or any other site in months, and not one before that in years. And I have never seen an ad in gmail.
Firefox becomes Lynx!
R.
Graphical ads have been around for a while -- everyone with a Google AdSense account knows that. The only new thing is that there's now *animation* as well.
You make a good point. Google's worst transgressions are systematically whitewashed by the press. To counteract that whitewash, I will use the remainder of my space here to expose Google for what it really is. One of my objectives is to improve the lot of humankind. (The merits of Google's obiter dicta won't be discussed here, because they lack merit.) When you get right down to it, one can predict on empirical grounds that one of these days Google will replace our timeless traditions with its footling ones. So what's the connection between that and its wheelings and dealings? The connection is that Google's doctrines may have been conceived in idealism, but they quickly degenerated into uncompromising pauperism. Some day, I want to stop this insanity. But you don't have to wait for that. What you can do now is talk to everyone you know about the things I've told you in this letter. Use every medium available to you. Use the Internet. Use your telephone. Use radio and newspapers. And whatever you do, never be afraid to speak out against the evil that is Google.
Of course I confronted him. I expect my children not to use their internet privileges to look at pornography. I think most any parent would agree.
As to the ads, the logs clearly showed that they only showed up when he visited certain sites, which he visits frequently, as I said. I would have expected to find another "r0mz" site without pornographic banner ads after he saw the first one. In fairness, most of the ads (there are an incredible number on these sites) are for fixed rate morgages and other nonsense I understand even less than the pornography ads. I mean, Jeffrey is only nine. What does he need with car insurance and cruises to Tahiti? Honestly, what horrible user profiling. Who is going to want car insurance and pirated versions of Mario Brothers at the same time?
And to your last bit -- as the saying goes, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
-- Molly Lipton, Born Again Technologist.
I consider more ads that you dont want to be a downgrade.
I thought about adblock, but after giving Jeffrey that lecture about stealing "r0mz" and so forth, I didn't see how I could do it. The way I see it, when someone puts ads on their site, that's an asking price for their content. They're giving you their bandwidth and work (though not really their work in the case of the "r0mz d00dz," I know). All they ask is that you look at and maybe click their ads.
I know it's annoying. I stopped reading a couple online newspapers just because I couldn't stand their ads. It's a shame, but as an ethical consumer, that's the choice I'm stuck with.
-- Molly Lipton, Born Again Technologist.
The OP is using AdSense when in fact should be AdWords. Advertsisers use AdWords, publishers use AdSense.
Ads are neccessary but they don't have to be graphical. AS USERS, WEBMASTERS AND ADVERTISERS, Google's text ads service really worked for me and just about everyone I know.
Yeah the breast metaphor made it way too obvious. You don't bring in those non-subtle trolls in the first paragraph, rookie.
But back to Google. AdSense is has some major problems associated with it. I'm not even talking about the click fraud that's been getting discussion lately. I'm talking about keyword fraud (buying AdSense advertising for keywords not related to your product) and outright fraud. A search for the TV show JAG gives sponsored links for ebay and three seperate websites for a fraudulent company (selling a rebranded version of LimeWire and a notice not to download copyrighted material "Watch & Download JAG Unlimited Downloads. 100% Legal")
Free MacMini
I've been cooking up some scripts that'll do the blocking before it gets to his computer. Basically, it looks at the page and the ads and replaces the page with a randomly selected image that tells him he better find another site if it has anything unseemly on it.
Just a little weekend perl hack. I've been working out the kinks though. Don't want to be overbearing, obviously.
-- Molly Lipton, Born Again Technologist.
Here are the facts. You are about to suffer from a heart-attack or psychosis if you don't chill out a bit and look after your health. You are damaging yourself by taking things too seriously, and by having an overly bitter outlook on life.
Please consult your health professional, or at least take up yoga or Tai Chi or something, for your own sake.
... and then they built the supercollider.
than a sneaky pervert.
Whether it's natural to want to look at pornography is not the point. The point is that pornography is degrading and turns good kids into creeps. Believe me, I know. I grew up with a lot of guys whose parents let them watch porn (mainly because they were never around -- even they wouldn't have allowed it if they had known). Every single one grew up to be a creepy weirdo.
I will never, ever tell my son that it is okay for him to watch pornography. It promotes a disgusting view of sex and women that I don't want my son to be exposed to. He will grow up with proper guidance where sex is concerned and that is more than enough. I only wish my mother were as engaged with my as I am with my son.
Finally, I resent the implication that you know how to raise my children better than I do. If I want advice, I'll write Dr. Laura.
-- Molly Lipton, Born Again Technologist.
I do not apologize for the amount of space in this letter I intend to devote to telling you about Google. Before I begin, let me point out that if Google can one day lay the foundation for some serious mischief, then the long descent into night is sure to follow. From the very beginning, bookish lotharios have labored to recruit into their ranks the sons and daughters of the powerful, famous, and rich, which is another way of saying that Google appears to have found a new tool to use to help it keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. That tool is cannibalism, and if you watch it wield it, you'll certainly see why every time it tells its trained seals that materialistic stirrers are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. Google has shown it's not afraid to be scummy. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that "Google" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone increase alienation and delinquency among our young people, I tell him or her to stop "Google-ing".
Who is behind the decline of our civilization? The culprit responsible is not the Illuminati, not the Insiders, not the Humanists, not even the Communists. No, the decline of our civilization is attributable primarily to Google. Even if our society had no social problems at all, we could still say that Google's deeds reek of frotteurism. I use the word "reek", because there's a time to keep silent and a time to speak. There's a time to love and a time to hate. There's a time for war and a time for peace. And, I aver, there's a time to summon up the courage to take up the all-encompassing challenge of freedom, justice, equality, and the pursuit of life with full dignity. Or, to put it less poetically, I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if Google wanted to, it could siphon off scarce international capital intended for underdeveloped countries. It could lock people up for reading the "wrong" sorts of books or listening to the "wrong" kinds of music. And it could put the foxes in charge of guarding the henhouse. We must not allow Google to do any of these. It's one thing to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide totalitarianism, but wanting to institutionalize sex discrimination by requiring different standards of protection and behavior for men and women is going too far. If I am doomed to play right into the hands of misguided sensualists, then Google will obviously engender ill will one of these days.
In a sense, honor means nothing to Google. Principles mean nothing to Google. All it cares about is how to make us less united, less moral, less sensitive, less engaged, and more perversely nerdy. That fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. We must change the minds of those who pass off all sorts of boisterous and obviously myopic stuff on others as a so-called "inner experience". As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to warn the public against those distasteful anarchists whose positive accomplishments are always practically nil, but whose conceit can scarcely be excelled.
It's easy for us to shake our heads at Google's foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should feed the starving, house the homeless, cure the sick, and still find wonder and awe in the sunrise and the moonlight. It's easy for us to say, "The idea of letting Google reduce human beings to the status of domestic animals is, in itself, pouty." The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because some people don't seem to mind that it likes to prevent me from getting my work done. What a corrupt world we live in!
How can Google live with itself, knowing that I must protest its use of rash reprobates
It is by animated gif alone I set my adblock in motion.
It is by the animation of images that ads acquire annoyance, the pages acquire stains.
The stains become a warning.
It is by animated gif alone I set my adblock in motion.
per dolorem ad astra
used to have a Santa web-site that for many years they ran without any advertising. One year, they decided to use a 3rd party company to serve ads in an attempt to make a little money off the site. At one point a pornographic ad was served up, generating a phone call from an irate parent. Although this was not the norm (and as far as I know it only happened once), the president of the company immediately stopped using that company. If more companies acted this way what you say might not be true any more. Unfortunately, it is currently true.
I think you missed the part where the GP mentioned what her son was learning - how to make pirated copies of software. In this case, blocking both sites would make sense. Kudos to her for handling the situation in a very cool-headed and logical manner.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Oh, yeah. After training AdBlock once or twice, I haven't seen a banner ad on Slashdot.
I forgot they even had them.
sigs, as if you care.
Use Firefox to block pop-ups and install the Adblock extension with the latest filter list to block ads. Haven't seen very many in a long time now -- 1995 style with 2005 content.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
I meant no banners on Yahoo!. Sorry for the thinko.
sigs, as if you care.
I will adblock them. Even if they are just on partner sites.
That is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. You either need remedial education, or a real job where you do don't have to whore for your living.
Adsense is what webmasters use to display adwords to get paid. Adwords is what advertisers pay for.
I exchanged some e-mails with a female friend who had just had several teeth knocked out in a sports mishap. Not a happy event for her, not a cheerful discussion...
The ads were things such as "Be Kissable 24/7 Fresher breath, whiter teeth, plus being kissable may save your life!"
I would hate to think of what ads I will see should I ever be discussing a fatal illness.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
I doubt anybody goes to great lengths to try and block text-based google adsense boxes (not sure if it's even possible, since they don't bother me.)
But should they introduce graphical ads...
Hal Spacejock: Science Fiction with Nuts
Dear Google,
g oo gle.html?hp&ex=1114488000&en=2f40e46713a7a21a&ei=5 094&partner=homepage
Reading
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/25/technology/25
this morning, I have to say I am disappointed.
I want you to understand that as a independent and "small time" webmaster, the most important thing for me is to keep what few daily visitors i have coming to my site happy. I operate the website at a loss as a service to my friends and family and as a hobby, I signed up with your AdSense program, not for the prospect of one day (in the distant future) receiving a check for 50 or 100 dollars but because I as a webmaster was proud to affiliate my website with your good name.
In light of the NY TIMES article, I am writing this letter to inform you that I will be dropping my affiliation with your AdSense program at the very first complaint I receive from any of my registered users in regards to obtrusive adverts or distracting animated images. You had a good thing going, please don't throw it away for (more) money.
Thats cool, can you make it work in an Emacs buffer too? ;)
I tend to download the latest one of these (the bottom) every so often and import it into adblock:
http://www.geocities.com/pierceive/adblock/
That guy deserves a knighthood.
My little Linux and tech blog
On a side note, Gmail finally supports IE5 in a limited form for me. So now I can log on to it without having to deal with Gmail-Lite. This is schoolwise, at home I use good ole' Firefox.
In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
It would be nice if Google Adwords worked as well as its search engine. It would also be nice if broad keywords actually worked full stop. Searching for "Foo Bar" will trigger ads with the keywords "Foo Bar", but won't trigger with "Bar Foo" or "Foo in Bar" or "Foo Bar UK".
It would also be nice if the keywords weren't mysteriously put 'on hold' and disabled for no apparent reason. Considering Google makes its money from adwords, why is it so badly programmed?
I read someplace in the privacy policy that they try to filter ads for personal situations like a death or a breakup.
If you have an e-mail thread yielding lots of advertisements, reply with:
"my grandmother died"
And they're all gone.
Maybe I'll make it my sig.
Dancin_Santa is one of the craftier trolls on slashdot. Check his post history, he is often trolling ... his "hooks" are usually fairly subtle though, which simply means he is good at trolling. In this case though it's not subtle, it's obvious that he is outright lying about Google's ad results.
People, don't feed the trolls.
I'm tired of seeing eBay ads with stuff like this:
get a new Ontario Hydro on eBay today!
its easy to bid on Ulcerative Colitis on eBay!
best place to buy blonde midget S&M porn is eBay! Bid today!
ok... well thats a bit of paraphrasing but you get the idea. Not that I've ever searched for any of those items. Nope.
OK, I have a question ...
How the hell do you remember which one is AdWords and which one is AdSense? Is there some kind of mnemonic rhyme I can memorize? It might not have been quite as sexy if they called the programs AdBuyer and AdShower, but it sure would have been easier on my brain.
Seriously, do you write it on the back of your hand, or what?
Like people, all companies have some amounts of good and bad in them. It's not some binary zero/one value - it's shades of gray. Also like people, some companies are mostly good but occasionally bad, and others are mostly bad but occasionally good. We judge people on the sum of their actions, not individual actions.
It's true though that saying your company's motto is "do no evil" is just asking for extra scrutiny. OTOH, it's a clever marketing move in an industry whose collective image has been VERY much tainted in the public eye by certain dominant players. They're standing up and saying, "look, you CAN get IT companies that don't try rip you off and do actually provide quality products".
BTW since when is defending the generic form (or similar forms) of your company's most valuable trademark from abuse by other companies "evil"? Not only is it not evil, but you are required by law to protect your trademarks if you don't want to lose them. I don't get it. If I try to start a search engine called e.g. "Boogle.com", of course I'm trying to make money riding off the popularity of Google's trademark.
It was only a matter of time.
YSL.
2 years and no mod points. Join reddit. Because openness is good.
Apparently, according to the article (you read it, right?) the ads are selected to maximize revenue, not just on the ads that pay most per click. This means that if an ad is not clicked much, because it is, say, annoying, then it won't actually come up as much...
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
They often choose the most sensationalist write-ups around here, pehaps because Slashdot's owner is also "a public company that needs revenue growth".
Free Hans!
I cant even get adsence on any of my sites. Textbox Networks is the only site that its on so far.. but i just dont understand how people can make mad cash off of any of these.
"when freedom is outlawed, the outlaws will be free"
Moderation -100, too damn long.
My homepage has 2 adsense ads and a few days ago it was driving me crazy because I have a PeopleSoft site and they were showing ads for real estate in Pleasanton. I wrote them (Google)an email and they wrote me back asking to see a screenshot. When I went back to take a screenshot, it was fine again (now showing PeopleSoft related ads). They were probably beta testing at the time.... My homepage.. http://www.peoplesoft-planet.com/
Onuora Amobi Founder: The Redmond Cloud https://www.theredmondcloud.com
You would be spamming a system designed to help people.
It's called a joke, douchey.
the kid is NINE YEARS OLD YOU FUCKING FREAK!
not wanting a nine year old watching porn IS NOT SHELTERING HIM!
what the fuck is the matter with you?? if you think nine year olds should be watching porn so they can "learn to think for themselves" you ARE a fucking pervert. jesus christ.