You decide who can see your information and know it's yours; the anonymous part means they don't know it's yours, which could be useful in large studies rather than indivudual treatment.
The important part is from what I've seen so far - many people liked Google for introducing unobtrusive text ads, but over time they've become less and less unobtrusive.
Snap, pretty much the same as my site.
Advertisers see that most of the clicks coming from your site are from the same people. They don't know whether it's people who are interested in the products, or just want to get you some money. And when Google gets around to looking they say it's the latter, and bye-bye AdSense.
It's understandable that there's false positives, the trouble is that Google doesn't give any explanation so you can't investigate or put in anything to block them.
Google is trying a pay-per-action type of advertising - it's pretty much like Amazon and other affiliates do where the cost is when something is bought.
Only a guess, as their methods are secret, but it seems that having a noticable number of addresses always clicking some adverts is a red flag. Of course, if you have a site which has low traffic and a high percentage are repeat visitors, then that's just the sort of clicking you're bound to get.
It's not really Google who are losing anything; the losers are the advertisers who pay out for invalid clicks that aren't caught, and the small web sites who get their sites closed because their traffic is anomalous.
There's plenty of CPM (cost per thousand) advertising out there - many of the "punch the monkey" type banners are CPM. And if you're never going to click the adverts, CPM is the only way the web site publisher is going to make any money from you.
Unfortunately a lot of time if the elements of whatever company we're working for wants a "Web 2.0" app, then that's what they want and asking "Hey, what problem are they trying to solve with this, and can we find a better solution?" is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
You decide who can see your information and know it's yours; the anonymous part means they don't know it's yours, which could be useful in large studies rather than indivudual treatment.
Ok, I'll bite - what do you tell them?
Desire causes suffering - if you really want to be enlightened you should wait for someone to steal all your possessions.
If it's my phone and I alter it, isn't this an official alteration?
Is this a school/university wide policy, and does every student know about it?
The important part is from what I've seen so far - many people liked Google for introducing unobtrusive text ads, but over time they've become less and less unobtrusive.
Snap, pretty much the same as my site. Advertisers see that most of the clicks coming from your site are from the same people. They don't know whether it's people who are interested in the products, or just want to get you some money. And when Google gets around to looking they say it's the latter, and bye-bye AdSense. It's understandable that there's false positives, the trouble is that Google doesn't give any explanation so you can't investigate or put in anything to block them.
"Moore's SAPACO" perhaps?
Google is trying a pay-per-action type of advertising - it's pretty much like Amazon and other affiliates do where the cost is when something is bought.
It's such a common thing that there's even parody sites such as http://www.clickmonkeys.com/ about it.
I've clicked on plenty of ads, usually to read information.
Only a guess, as their methods are secret, but it seems that having a noticable number of addresses always clicking some adverts is a red flag. Of course, if you have a site which has low traffic and a high percentage are repeat visitors, then that's just the sort of clicking you're bound to get.
It's not really Google who are losing anything; the losers are the advertisers who pay out for invalid clicks that aren't caught, and the small web sites who get their sites closed because their traffic is anomalous.
Aren't they all owned by the same company?
Or rather, previously impassable
If they can teleport then why do they need an aircraft?
There's plenty of CPM (cost per thousand) advertising out there - many of the "punch the monkey" type banners are CPM. And if you're never going to click the adverts, CPM is the only way the web site publisher is going to make any money from you.
To be quite honest I didn't know that - so it looks like if you have an iPhone then you're stuck in America or else paying huge prices?
They tried to phone him about it...
Usually I remove the sim and get a local pay-as-you-go sim so I can use the phone wherever I am.
Unfortunately a lot of time if the elements of whatever company we're working for wants a "Web 2.0" app, then that's what they want and asking "Hey, what problem are they trying to solve with this, and can we find a better solution?" is irrelevant.
So age/illness is a reason for divorce? And Iraq must be creating a lot of single people.
A way to share music?
Would a judge know the difference between 'source code' and the source of the program?
If you blink the angels will get you.