points by Xenoamorphous 13 hours ago | 0 comments
I’ve always wondered what % of ad clicks are just misclicks.
[–] netcoyote 13 hours ago
[–] Gareth321 13 hours ago
That's hilarious. I miss the old Battle.net.
[–] PaulHoule 13 hours ago
"All clicks are click fraud" is related to the dead internet theory.
[–] saghm 13 hours ago
I get what you're saying, but fraud is different from accidents by otherwise real people.
[–] PaulHoule 12 hours ago
Well... I'd say that
Many of those "accidents" are not really accidents: I've seen two kinds of ways sites engineer those "accidents"
(1) many sites, like phys.org, have crowded and confusing layouts that try to trick you on clicking on an "x" or something to close an ad but really clicking on the ad, there's a lot of deniability on this on mobile where the touch accuracy is poor
(2) a few years back there were a lot of sites which seemed to always change the layout when you were trying to click on something in the sidebar, anandtech was one of the worst, i could swear they were watching the mouse events and predicting the click events. this stopped all of a sudden, could be Google put the smack-down on this behavior
We weren’t aware of this.
The ad company we used notified us of this issue and gave us three days to fix it. Afterwards our click-through rate went from something like 3% to .25%.