Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    657 points tantalor | 65 comments | | HN request time: 1.284s | source | bottom
    1. elamje ◴[] No.43540034[source]
    Have a friend high up at one of the “Big 3” in this space.

    The entire business model is predicated on injecting themselves as the last click for attribution even when they weren’t remotely responsible for the conversion. Cool business, but can’t keep going on forever without someone catching on.

    replies(11): >>43540055 #>>43540275 #>>43540359 #>>43540511 #>>43540903 #>>43541153 #>>43541439 #>>43542016 #>>43542427 #>>43542980 #>>43543090 #
    2. chatmasta ◴[] No.43540055[source]
    I remember when this was called cookie stuffing, and eBay even sent a guy to jail for doing it with their affiliate program. That’s the same eBay that owned PayPal, which now owns Honey…
    replies(6): >>43540086 #>>43540174 #>>43540203 #>>43540507 #>>43541511 #>>43541574 #
    3. AlexandrB ◴[] No.43540086[source]
    Do as I say not as I do.
    replies(1): >>43540182 #
    4. cyral ◴[] No.43540174[source]
    Interesting, I found an article about it: https://www.businessinsider.com/shawn-hogan-sentenced-in-eba...
    replies(1): >>43540373 #
    5. gruez ◴[] No.43540182{3}[source]
    To be fair Paypal got spun out in 2015, far before they bought Honey, so there actually isn't any point in time where eBay was engaged in cookie stuffing.
    6. nightfly ◴[] No.43540203[source]
    Now they can just avoid paying for affiliate links for anyone who has honey installed
    7. Joel_Mckay ◴[] No.43540275[source]
    Marketers monitor the conversion rates very closely. Chances are some people caught on to the shenanigans within 24 hours, but couldn't figure out which part of the lead generation ecosystem was cheating.

    What Honey did robbed content publishers of ad revenue, advertisers lead valuations, and end consumer confidence (bait-and-switch.)

    I wouldn't want to be in the blast radius of that legal mess... Popcorn ready for when the judge defines the scope of who is liable =3

    replies(1): >>43540998 #
    8. threeseed ◴[] No.43540359[source]
    > but can’t keep going on forever without someone catching on

    But despite a lot of coverage they've only lost about 1/5 of their user base.

    replies(1): >>43541547 #
    9. chatmasta ◴[] No.43540373{3}[source]
    Yeah he was also the owner of DigitalPoint if anyone remembers that forum and era.
    10. stevage ◴[] No.43540507[source]
    Didn't the guy that ran Skeptoid go to jail for similar?
    replies(1): >>43540650 #
    11. miki123211 ◴[] No.43540511[source]
    Now what I'd love is an extension that would inject a person of my choosing as the last click.

    Amazon et al don't allow you to offer this as an affiliate program partner, not without a special and custom agreement at least, but if the extension was partner-agnostic and released by a party unaffiliated with Amazon in any way, there's nothing they could realistically do about it.

    It'd be one way to bring Amazon Smile back, and on many more sites than just Amazon.

    replies(1): >>43541041 #
    12. nadir_ishiguro ◴[] No.43540650{3}[source]
    I'm sorry what? Skeptoid the podcast?

    Edit: Yes. In 2014. How did I miss that? Used to listen to that podcast, though probably stopped before that.

    replies(1): >>43540693 #
    13. grumbel ◴[] No.43540693{4}[source]
    Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Dunning_(author)#Wire_fr...
    replies(1): >>43541145 #
    14. unsui ◴[] No.43540903[source]
    > Cool business

    No it isn't. It's predatory (actually, parasitic) by its very nature.

    I'm all for innovation, but that's just not cool.

    replies(3): >>43541015 #>>43541162 #>>43543203 #
    15. justinator ◴[] No.43540998[source]
    It's very hard to figure out as in many instances the affiliate link part of a link is stripped out before clicked.

    There's a browser extension for that too.

    replies(1): >>43541643 #
    16. EGreg ◴[] No.43541015[source]
    Cool URLs dont change
    17. EGreg ◴[] No.43541041[source]
    I always found Amazon Smile weird. Why not just donate, why have people jump through hoops just to prove that you should donate? So you look good but dont spend much money to do it due to user laziness. Ah… got it :)
    replies(1): >>43541689 #
    18. technothrasher ◴[] No.43541145{5}[source]
    I remember at the time being less than surprised at the charges. Dunning always felt a little off to me, even though I did enjoy his podcast.
    19. echelon ◴[] No.43541153[source]
    > Cool business

    Shameful parasitism. The engineers working on this garbage knew what they were doing. I'd question the ethics of anyone who worked on this.

    replies(2): >>43541913 #>>43544912 #
    20. catigula ◴[] No.43541162[source]
    I think it's cool in the sense that's it a cool concept for a (alleged) scam.
    21. paulryanrogers ◴[] No.43541439[source]
    Shame so many creators took the Honey paycheck, even while Honey was taking money out of their pocket by stealing affiliate links. I guess few really vet their sponsors. Not even LTT or MrBeast!
    replies(4): >>43541623 #>>43542478 #>>43543344 #>>43545099 #
    22. maximus-decimus ◴[] No.43541511[source]
    Considering eBay also had management that harassed people by mailing them live spiders and dead pig fetuses... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ebay-pay-3-million-empl...
    replies(2): >>43541670 #>>43543190 #
    23. whycome ◴[] No.43541547[source]
    Apathy? Communications spin? Lack of technical understanding? I suspect some people installed it on a whim based on the recommendation of someone and then forgot about it.
    replies(2): >>43541748 #>>43542644 #
    24. kevin_thibedeau ◴[] No.43541574[source]
    It's totally different you see. This time the fraud was done by a faceless corporation maximizing shareholder returns so this is just an exercise in free speech by an immortal, in the same vein as running an unlicensed lottery.
    replies(1): >>43541694 #
    25. YuccaGloriosa ◴[] No.43541623[source]
    When I first heard all this about honey I was shocked, remembering seeing Linus plug them. Of all the people to have the potential ability to see through it. The way I see it is that anyone who sponsors things like YouTube videos as widely as they do is generally a piece of s** company. Normally up to something, that makes it worth their while to spaff money on such things. 80 quid razors, AI driven news classifiers, VPNs, meh...
    replies(4): >>43542510 #>>43543716 #>>43544045 #>>43544802 #
    26. Joel_Mckay ◴[] No.43541643{3}[source]
    It was very similar to the classic banner substitution malware/adware from the early internet.

    Most media people have gone back to unique affiliate discount-coupon-codes instead of clickable URL parameters to track lead referrals.

    Unfortunately, this also leads to sampling bias, and campaigns spelunking spam statistics. I'd guess on YT irritating people drives engagement in some twisted way. lol =3

    27. chris_wot ◴[] No.43541670{3}[source]
    Wow, the former Senior Director of Safety and Security was sent to prison for 57 months! That's some great work by eBay.

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/final-defendant-ebay-cybe...

    replies(1): >>43548151 #
    28. eru ◴[] No.43541689{3}[source]
    Well, it's no less weird that store running a promotion saying 'If you buy item X today, we will donate one dollar of the proceeds to charity Y.'

    Also not more weird than the British charity thing of "I'm shaving off all my hair, and that's why you should donate to charity Y." (I suspect Brits need an excuse before they are mentally allowed to do something silly. But any excuse will do.)

    replies(1): >>43543098 #
    29. SamuelAdams ◴[] No.43541694{3}[source]
    Kind of like how most spyware is now called “employee monitoring tools”. This stuff used to be frowned upon but now I guess the narrative has changed.
    replies(2): >>43542563 #>>43544630 #
    30. not_kurt_godel ◴[] No.43541748{3}[source]
    Scam culture thrives on apathy and ignorance, just count this as yet another win for the bad guys who profit immensely off our increasing societal stupidity
    31. dvektor ◴[] No.43541913[source]
    Am I the only one that detected sarcasm? (cool business)
    replies(1): >>43542752 #
    32. anonwebguy ◴[] No.43542016[source]
    Hijacking this for visibility.

    I had this idea before Honey. When we spoke to our attorney, he instantly told us "that won't fly; you'll get popped for cookie stuffing."

    The adware world had been doing similar things forever - injecting fake results into Google, taking over default home pages to show Google look-alikes.

    When Honey launched on Reddit and got their first user bump, I started building our prototype. While digging deeper, you discover Honey injects JavaScript from their API, which violates extension store TOS, yet somehow this flies.

    Fast forward, they hire the CEO of Commission Junction (CJ) as their CFO and everything becomes gravy.

    Try to get offers via CJ, you won't get a response. All affiliate networks (CJ, Rakuten/LinkShare, etc.) have "stand down" policies in their contracts. You're supposed to detect when someone takes action like clicking a coupon site link and "stand down." Honey never did this. We had to demonstrate it was happening, but bring it up to CJ and they won't care.

    It's regulatory capture of a borderline illegal business.

    All cited studies came from RetailMeNot (since taken down). They claim customers abandon carts for coupons. Sure, some do, but those people will probably convert anyway.

    Today, coupons are dying. We're in the world of personalized offers. Most coupon codes don't exist anymore - they're offer links. These systems try to "find you a coupon" which isn't real.

    You're not supposed to share personalized coupons. These systems capture your coupons and add them to their list, but they almost never work.

    I'd never try this business again. It's dishonest and terrible.

    Fun fact: Much of this goes back to adware/search XML feeds from parking pages. IAC had a division called Mindspark Interactive Network (recently closed) - their adware division generating insane profit through Pay-Per-Download scam browser extensions tricking your grandfather, hijacking affiliate link clicks, same playbook.

    The affiliate networks don't care as long as referrers look like they match approved pages.

    This industry needs to die.

    replies(1): >>43552065 #
    33. soulofmischief ◴[] No.43542427[source]
    I'm having a hard time understanding precisely what is cool about the business of defrauding users and creators/businesses.
    34. pclmulqdq ◴[] No.43542478[source]
    You just named the biggest sellouts in their respective spaces. LTT in "tech" youtube and Mr Beast on youtube.
    35. jack_pp ◴[] No.43542510{3}[source]
    Why would Linus have the ability to see through it? He isn't into software, probably can't code at all. His channel is dedicated to hardware
    replies(1): >>43542768 #
    36. brewtide ◴[] No.43542563{4}[source]
    It was time to go back to the orifice....
    37. wingworks ◴[] No.43542644{3}[source]
    Well, what do the end users care. So long as they get there honey $$. Yes, sucks for the real referer, and youtube creators doing the promoting (though they probably got paid more directly from Honey to do the ad then they would've gotten from there affil links).

    Though, like what was exposed, Honey does a poor job for the end user too. There are other cashback sites out there doing what Honey claims/does, but passes on more to the end user. Though they're all taking the referral $$ from the real referer, if there was one.

    38. unsui ◴[] No.43542752{3}[source]
    On HN, you have a significant subset that think it is akshually cool, unironically

    Move fast and break things, right?

    39. cbozeman ◴[] No.43542768{4}[source]
    And he's not actually that great at that, if his storage server videos are any indication.
    replies(1): >>43550126 #
    40. ◴[] No.43542980[source]
    41. pbreit ◴[] No.43543090[source]
    Dumb acquisition by PayPal. It should stick to "above board" financial services. Stuff like this erodes trust.
    replies(1): >>43549265 #
    42. chihuahua ◴[] No.43543098{4}[source]
    I've always been baffled by the British charity thing: You want to ride your tricycle from John O'Groats to Ffestiniog? Fine, do it. You want me to donate to this charity? OK, maybe I'll do it. I just don't see the connection between the two. Please explain the connection to me. You don't actually want to ride your tricycle? But if I donate to some third party, you're going to do something you hate? So you're saying I want you to suffer? I'd rather donate if it doesn't cause unnecessary suffering.
    replies(5): >>43543342 #>>43543396 #>>43544566 #>>43548776 #>>43553498 #
    43. gorgoiler ◴[] No.43543190{3}[source]
    Aside, but NBC’s website is way better executed than I was expecting.

    Perhaps it changed recently, or I just never noticed? I was expecting 100MB with back button abuse and retention dark patterns. Instead, it loads fast, has minimal guff, and the footer scrolled into view ending the page within sight of the end of the actual article.

    Perhaps this is a reward response to not having to / be able to doom scroll?

    replies(1): >>43544187 #
    44. ◴[] No.43543203[source]
    45. sksksk ◴[] No.43543342{5}[source]
    The charity you’re raising for sets up the infrastructure to do the activity. Charities, for example, have spots in marathons which are hard to get other wise.

    So if you see a friend is trying to do some personal achievement, and you think the charity is a worthwhile one to donate to; why not combine the two and help your friend achieve their goal whilst also raising money for a good cause.

    46. cedws ◴[] No.43543344[source]
    BetterHelp is arguably worse. Everything I've heard about them sounds terrible, but they're all over YouTube and presumably they're getting a lot of vulnerable customers who will never receive the support they need.

    The YouTubers that peddle this shit have no morals.

    replies(1): >>43550657 #
    47. alias_neo ◴[] No.43543396{5}[source]
    It's something we've been raised to do from a young age.

    I've never thought about it before, but I suppose it's a way for you to provide some commitment from yourself as a condition for those you're crowdsourcing donations from.

    If you don't deliver on your part, they don't have to pay.

    When I was in high-school we did everything from shaving our heads, to having your legs waxed in front of the whole (boys) school.

    I raised thousands of £ for charity this way, more than I could ever raise by myself at that age.

    48. floydnoel ◴[] No.43543716{3}[source]
    My more general rule is that anything being advertised to me must be way overpriced or a scam, in order to pay for the expensive advertisements. I won’t buy nearly anything I see advertised. I don’t run into many ads anyway, but some always get through!
    49. matejn ◴[] No.43544045{3}[source]
    Here I have to chime in and say that a certain YouTube razor is one of my favourite purchases ever. But I guess it's rather niche, being a double edged safety razor.
    50. walthamstow ◴[] No.43544187{4}[source]
    It's not great without uBlock but still much better than most others. No video!
    51. thaumasiotes ◴[] No.43544566{5}[source]
    I assume the concept is that if you do what the person asks you to do, you get to share in the glory of whatever it is that they do.
    52. chii ◴[] No.43544630{4}[source]
    if the computer belongs to the company, and you're using it as an employee, you should be told that such spyware is installed and your usage of said machines are monitored. Then there's no qualms about this at all.

    It's only an invasion of privacy if the monitoring is done in secret.

    replies(1): >>43550075 #
    53. blitzar ◴[] No.43544802{3}[source]
    > Of all the people to have the potential ability to see through it.

    lol

    54. kome ◴[] No.43544912[source]
    i think you are missing the irony.

    but you are also missing the fact that the great part of the industry works in the same way: using open source stuff, in a super parasitic way, to track and control millions of users.

    the average googler here is not better here.

    p.s.: great nickname btw. and on point.

    55. dspillett ◴[] No.43545099[source]
    LTT did eventually vet what was going on and spot the problem, but didn't have the morals to let anyone else know about the scam. And has since played the victim card (“Mommy, they are saying a nasty thing about us!” and “Other people had the same lack of morals too, why are you picking on us?”) having been called out for not warning others out there that they were being scammed.
    56. runamok ◴[] No.43548151{4}[source]
    Now share what happened to the CEO. Behind the bastards did a great 2 part series on the insane tale: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236...
    57. maest ◴[] No.43548776{5}[source]
    Movember.
    58. autoexec ◴[] No.43549265[source]
    Paypals entire history should tell you that they can't be trusted. https://web.archive.org/web/20170312164635/http://www.paypal...
    59. kvlh ◴[] No.43550075{5}[source]
    |It's only an invasion of privacy if the monitoring is done in secret.

    Uhhh... that seems very incorrect. If someone pokes their head into your shower session, it's an invasion of privacy - whether or not they let you know they're peepin on ya.

    replies(1): >>43553272 #
    60. chrisdsaldivar ◴[] No.43550126{5}[source]
    I haven’t seen the videos and don’t know much about the space. Could your provide any insight into what’s wrong?
    61. lbarron6868 ◴[] No.43550657{3}[source]
    Every single podcast I listen to is sponsored by BetterHelp, nearly all of them.
    replies(1): >>43563493 #
    62. mbirth ◴[] No.43552065[source]
    > I had this idea before Honey

    AdBlock Plus also had this idea back in 2012/2013.

    Here’s a (German) article about this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20220817235820/https://www.mobil...

    Near the end he mentions the typoRules.js, rules.json, urlfixer stuff and Yieldkit. Apparently, whenever you’ve mis-typed a URL to e.g. amazon, it auto-corrected it and added their own affiliate id (which was then valid for 30 days). And the feature only needed very few changes to get applied even to correct links.

    63. thatguy0900 ◴[] No.43553272{6}[source]
    The equivalent here is if it's a company shower, and your supposed to be cleaning an office appliance, not yourself. In that context someone poking their head on to see how it's going is fine.
    64. greycol ◴[] No.43553498{5}[source]
    I'm sure I've seen dunk tanks (throw a baseball, hit the target, person falls in) in plenty of US movies though no idea how common that is in reality.

    Regardless, one of the nice things about the practice is does mean people are at least somewhat committed to a cause they are raising funds for before they go soliciting. It also deals with the irrational part of the human psyche and moves the action conceptually from the person begging to the person trading which can have an impact on how people perceive it.

    65. dpig_ ◴[] No.43563493{4}[source]
    I'd take that as an indictment on those podcasts. All the stuff I listened to / watched that used them in the past has dropped them for more than a year by now.

    I think Johnny Harris may still run adverts for them? But I watch him mostly because he's such a suspicious character to begin with.