Unknown's avatar

About JoeDuck

Internet Travel Guy, Father of 2, small town Oregon life. BS Botany from UW Madison Wisconsin, MS Social Sciences from Southern Oregon. Top interests outside of my family's well being are: Internet Technology, Online Travel, Globalization, China, Table Tennis, Real Estate, The Singularity.

Ringtone Scams and PPC Fraud – why so little outrage?


One of my most read and commented blog posts relates to Ringtone Scams, a scandalous scourge of the internet, with collusion of most of the major phone companies. I’m confident these ringtone scams will soon be making more mainstream headlines.

Along with Pay Per Click fraud, ringtone scams, unlike some other online frauds and deceptions like phishing, have not quite made the big radar screens because they are harder to understand than traditional deceptive business practices such as bait and switch at a store or salespeople lying. In those “storefront” cases you can often confront the scamming salesperson or store directly, a powerful tool lacking in the online world.

What frustrates me is the level of tolerance for these practices, especially in the online community. Very questionable in scope and scale was the recent slap on the wrist of Google for failing to catch what appears to be massive PPC fraud – perhaps as much as a billion dollars per year. Contrary to the claims of all the PPC players much of the fraud could be eliminated with more careful screening and identification of contracted parties in the online transaction. This would eat into profits and therefore has been a low priority, but when as much as 25% of online advertising revenue may be obtained through fraud it’s time to stop expecting advertisers, often unwitting ones, to paying the price. This means the PPC outlets, especially Google who reaps the lions share of PPC profit (and therefore PPC ill gotten gains), should be paying a LOT more attention.

Xbox 360 Table Tennis Review


Part of the deal when we bought my son an XBox 360 was that he get the Rockstar Games Table Tennis Video Game, widely reviewed as a masterpiece of realism.   I’m a regular competitive Table Tennis player and fan and I’m really impressed by how realistic the game is in terms of *watching* the play.  However, since you use controllers rather than paddles much of the play is counterintuitive (e.g. you don’t do anything to hit the ball, rather the controller adjusts for your location, ball placement, and spin.)

I’m glad people will gain more respect for quality Table Tennis, though I doubt much of the viewed skill will transfer to the real game.

My son simply crushes me at the video game.

Ironically this game is made by the same folks who brought the controversial Grand Theft Auto (“GTA”) series of games so wrought with violence and cruelty that they were banned in Australia and have become a poster boy game company for the anti-video game lobby.

No, you can’t shoot or rob your virtual table tennis opponent, though maybe that’ll come in the next version…

Yahoo! Corporate Blog. Believe it or not, it’s cool.


I’m not usually a fan of corporate blogs because they usually suck in that sucky self-serving way, but based on a quick take the Yahoo blog, Yodel Anecdotal (I like it!) is going to be a light hearted view from and of a company filled with very clever people.   I’ll still turn to Jeremy for the unvarnished insider view, but this looks like the place to get a feel for a company that’s breaking a lot of new Web 2.0 ground even though they are not getting nearly enough credit for it. 

Now, if only the Panama team could get their act in gear maybe I’d be right about Yahoo stock potential.

Google Books = Good Google. Adding UC Books = Great!


What I really like about Tim O’Reilly is that he’s almost always …. right.   More importantly he does a fine job of seeing where things are going in our increasingly frantic and complex digital maelstrom.

As a publisher Tim’s insights into the Google scanning controversies are very relevant and over at his blog he’s making a lot of great points about why Google should be cut loose to spread the digital word.

O’Reilly suggests that “Google’s initiative is innovative, useful, and a real boost to an industry that has yet to make significant headway with electronic books….”

Right on O’Reilly.

You call US military spending a bargain? I want my money back.


At a Pentagon news conference I’m watching on TV Don Rumsfeld is explaining to me that with only 3.8% of US Gross Domestic Product going towards military spending nobody should complain since this is lower than back in the good old days of  Mutually Assured Destruction nuclear buildups.

I’m complaining.

Neoconservative hypocrisy regarding Government spending has become far more outrageous than the naivete that continues to characterize liberal notions that Governments are a good environment for the allocation of other people’s money.   They are not, and they have never been.

Political spending, whether in the social or military sectors, is rarely rational spending, and tends to evolve quickly into territorial “feathering of nests”, inefficient allocations, and choices based on conflicting sets of Government priorities. This was well understood by the founders who wanted Government small and taxes low.

Although “fighting terrorism” is a legitimate Government objective, the current approaches are so recklessly expensive it is unlikely they can continue much longer.  Also, military spending does not build infrastructure (often it destroys it), so unless you are truly saving the nation from disaster – a weak argument given the current state of the world  – wasteful military spending has far less favorable impact than, for example, wasteful spending on infrastructure.    However I’m not advocating wasteful liberal spending either.

Alternatives?    Recognize that risk is a part of life, allocate resources rationally, and trust that people will spend their money far more effectively than the neoconservatives have been spending it, or the liberals will spend it when they take control of the bloating corpse of Government spending.

Global Challenges vs Global Warming. An Inconvenient Truth * * *


I finally got to see “An Inconvenient Truth” On the upside I think Al Gore comes off like the fine, sincere, bright fellow he is.    A movie like this around election 2000 would have given Florida, and the Presidency, to Al Gore.   The film’s creative use of graphics and video is also very impressive.  This is educational media used in compelling fashion and all presenters should take note of this approach which cleverly blends animation, video, and lecture.

Unfortunately the fundamental premise of this film – that global catastrophe is looming just around the corner – is misguided and not supported by the science Gore claims he holds so dear.   As the film suggests, global warming is well established and it has become clear that much of that warming is a result of human processes (anthropogenic warming).   However, the film strongly implies that castastrophic sea level rises and weather conditions are “likely” when science says only that they are “possible”.   Many things are possible and it’s very foolish to allocate resources without addressing “how likely is this to happen?”.

The science Gore abuses to support the wild claims comes mostly from IPCC reports which actually suggest that sea levels will probably rise at most a few feet *over the next century*.  The best estimates suggest that global climate change is not creating catastrophic sea level rises and killer storms.

What is certain is that we have many current global catastrophes.  They are the hunger, disease, and bad water supplies that plague hundreds of millions of people on earth right now, killing tens of thousands of people *daily*.

First let’s solve those problems, which are much cheaper and easier to solve than global warming and have much clearer and immediate positive benefits.

Clear thinking people should work towards prioritizing issues of global concern and then solving as many of those significant global concerns as possible given the constraints of money, politics, and human ignorance.  Drive less?  Sure.   Support wise resource use?  Of course.   We should apply common sense principles to all problems and wiser use of resources is important.   It’s just not the world’s most pressing problem.  Not by a long shot.

Rather than simply jump on another alarmist bandwagon of the many that litter the historical landscape I’d hope folks will ask themselves “If I could allocate a billion dollars to solving some global problems, what would be the best use of that money?”

Need a hint? It’s been done here:  Copenhagen Consensus 

Must be Good to be Google


Just in from my “biting the hand that is going to feed me at next week’s Google Party” department:

It must be great to go unchallenged in your sector, especially in the hyper-competitive big money internet extravanza.

Over at WebMasterworld people are doing their usual fawning over the greatness of Google search, this despite the fact that Yahoo and MSN are close in quality according to most objective analyses, that history suggests dominance is often short lived, and that search dominance really does not bode well for anybody except Google.  I posted the following comment over there:

———–
I still use mostly Google out of habit but I predict that Yahoo’s recent move to bring social network and tagging information into the results will be successful and may even land them on top until Google relaxes it’s “no human ranking” approaches.

This thread surprises me as most objective measures indicate that Google  is the best, but not by much and certainly not always best if compared to good vertical search tools.  Habit is driving SE choice, not careful analysis of result sets.

Also, I think there will be legal battles when Vista launches over default search in future versions of IE browsers, MS will win most of them, and Google market share will go down with new users.

Search dominance is not healthy for users or webmasters – this community should recognize that more than most.
——————-

Mechanistic Apocalypse on the way?


Even if you are not religious and believe the world runs on fundamentally mechanistic principles you need to fear that current global tensions could in fact lead to the type of destruction envisioned by those who hold that an Apocalypse is coming … soon.

Israel could lay waste to the entire Middle east in minutes and it’s unlikely that a broader war with Iran would not bring in the USA and perhaps Europe.

Pakistan and India continue to threaten nuclear exchanges.   And North Korea?   Yikes.

But rather than *prophetic*, I find it  *ironic* that these tensions are more often than not fueled by the recent and rapid rise of thinking and analysis more in line with what was in vogue in 12th century than even the Renaissance, a curious blend of religious fantasy, zealotry, and denial.

Will we as humans pay the ultimate price for our primal notions of how the world works?   Only your primal brain knows for sure.

Google sucks at Table Tennis?


I’ve always wanted to play Table Tennis with Sergey Brin at a Google Party because 1) Russians are usually pretty good at Table Tennis and 2) He seems like a cool guy.
But this report, indicating that Google sucks at Table Tennis, came as a surprise to me. Maybe you need to go to Google’s China offices to get a good game on?

OK, here’s my challenge to Sergey Brin via email.   I’m not optimistic about a reply, but it never hurts to ask.

——————————————

Dear Mr. Brin,

I have a hunch you are a good Table Tennis player and I’d like to
challenge you to a game sometime during the Google Party.

If you are a gambling man how about playing for $1000  *per point*
with all proceeds to an international charity of your choice or to
Google.org?

P.S.  Thanks for Google.org, which I hope will become Google’s
greatest contribution to humanity.
——————————–

Myspace vs Congress


Myspace and other social networking sites won’t be accessible from schools or libraries as a result of  congressional legislation passed a few days ago.   The Myspace ban was a fairly predictable type of response from congress, reflecting increasing concerns by adults who basically had no idea what their children were doing online.

The Myspace ban is very unlikely to have much of an effect on anything since kids, and the predators the bill is supposed to help thwart – probably were not using these access venues very much.   Hopefully the news about this will get some parents to pay closer attention to their children’s online activities, which in general should be supervised far more than they are by all but a few parents.

As a parent I’m more supportive of restrictions and content filtering than most other internet folks, but I think the entire debate is missing a key point regarding a dramatic change in social norms.

I’d suggest that changes in social norms are something like those that happened in the USA in the 1960’s in both scope and substance, but that these changes in morality, personal identity, and social responsibility are “going global” thanks to online activities, online communities, and the explosive cross-cultural connectivity facilitated by 24/7 broadband access and online awareness.

Silly laws like this will hardly put the online Pandoras back in their boxes.   However it will also be funny to hear free speech zealots whining about government intervention which will never have a chance of making truly significant changes.

The ships of sweeping social change sailed long ago and they are powered by exploding global online communities.   Our best course is to look forward to the uncharted waters.