Chaos in Paradise

"Vigilante justice on the Web". CNET Top 100 List

Vigilante justice...that's the general impression I seem to throw out, for better or for worse. Thing is, I'm a man on a mission - but let's not get sidetracked. Because crappy logic games and circular reasoning, as well as the old classic "it's a purely subjective opinion, therefore I win" always intrude when talking about - God, I hate this word - Adware.

And it looks like this article, written by Eric Goldman in response to something Ben Edelman put out, has caused some heat. Heat amongst some of the advertisers mentioned, heat from some advertisers who had nothing to do with it - in short, hot stuff blasting all over the place, and Ben E right smack in the middle of it. Not to mention Eric, who (in his post's first incarnation) seemingly likened (accidentally or not) the "spyware zealots" (of which, I suppose he would class myself as one) to the Nazis. You know, those wonderful people that tried to destroy the whole of Civilization and turned Jewish people into lampshades, amongst various other wonderful things. Nice one, Eric. We now have a typo to rival my own, though by all accounts yours included a poem so you probably get top billing.

A hasty edit followed (complete with apologetic explanation and retraction), which now seems to have morphed once more into:

[NB: I've made some changes to the previous paragraph to clarify some points that may have been misinterpreted.]

Yes, thanks for that.

Well, for the record, it seems everyone is obsessed with playing word games and defending their honour and also making some value judgements about the worth of certain individuals. Let's put this baby to bed, and set it on fire.

FOR THE RECORD:

As I have stated many, many times before - the "Adware" battle is not my battle. I am not overly interested in the concept of "pop-up" adverts. I do not care about a banner-ad built into a clock that does the same job as the one that comes with your operating system. I have no time for fishing out the money trail that starts with company A and ends with company Z, before blasting said companies into oblivion. This is the domain of Ben Edelman, and there is no one better than him at doing it. Me?

I'm interested in the crazier kinds of installs - the ones from the grey - the ones that people thought would sneak in under the radar, and I demand some small amount of vengeance for it in return. This is my stomping ground, and I'd like to think in my wilder moments that I'm rather good at it.

And if I find something floating around the backwaters of the net - the next "hot" method of install (because the people behind it think it won't be discovered for some time) - then you better believe I'm smearing you all over this website.

Want to call me a zealot?

Go right ahead. Someone I know is possibly dead because of the asshat industry that seems unable (or unwilling) to grow up, and I am the inevitable result of the monster that you spawned.

What's your excuse?

Why are you surprised that people like Edelman choose to examine every aspect of where the money comes from and (more importantly), where it goes to? Are the various actions that have been perpetrated in the last couple of years not enough to have given him the right to rip every last angle wide open for people to make their own minds up?

You may not agree with everything Ben says. The beauty is, you don't have to - no doubt, there are things I do and say that he (and many others) will not agree with either. But I still demand the right to view this information. And in the case of Goldman's blog, he seems to be saying that the stones should be left unturned. Move along, nothing to see here.

Sorry - I disagree.

Goldman makes a big deal out of the "money trail", stating:

Based on this 6 step process, Ben’s report reaches the conclusions that "Claria pays spyware vendors to show Claria's own ads through their popups," "Claria funds and supports such vendors" and "Claria Shows Ads Through Exploit-Delivered Popups."

I feel like someone--anyone--ought to establish that a money source six contractual relations away is "supporting"/"paying"/"funding" the downstream party. If we don't agree with this grammatical construction, there's nothing interesting at all in the report.(emphasis mine)

Once again - I disagree.

Forget about the money daisy chain for a moment, and answer this simple question: once the money hit the target, did (as ben's title asks) "Claria show an ad through an exploit delivered popup"?

Yes.

Is Ben's final point:

For now, spyware-delivered popups continue to promote many of the world's leading merchants -- including, thanks to Claria's BehaviorLink, Amazon.com.

True?

Yes.

Whether we like it or not, everybody's hands are tainted in some way, big or small, when that software is delivered onto the PC without consent.

Want to cry about it? Sorry, not listening. Don't pretend we are stupid - everybody knows who everybody else is, especially in the advertising game - who the players are, the "big four", the reformers, the bad guys, the ones that will happily try and get away with murder; the con-men, the good-guys and the mighty overlords such as CJ - fear their asswhupping wrath.

My point is, nobody is so stupid that they can try and feign naivety when they cut a deal with x, y and z. They know perfectly well where the money is going (or likely to go) and if they don't - well, why are you doing business with an unknown quantity in the first place? If I know, then why don't you?

Come on.

Like nobody has ever heard of 02320.com, Zedo, Yieldmanager and all the rest of them. Like nobody knows what paths the money is likely to take before the deal is even done.

Like nobody knows that fullscreen, craptacular adverts are going to fill the desktop once the software is installed.

Yeah, right. When you're done pulling the other one, get your laughing gear around this:

Here is my message to all of the ad networks - the big ones, the small ones, the good ones and the bad ones. Enjoy it.

I have no problem with people using your software. I have no beef with popup adverts when they're done right. I could care less if someone wants to install an Active X plugin, assuming they wanted it in the first place. I am not the advertising bogeyman. I am not the scary monster that busts down your door and slices you up into little pieces at four in the morning.

However - CNET got one thing right. I am an online vigilante. I enjoy using chunks of gunpowder laden text to directly impact what I feel to be corrupt revenue streams. I am the greatest song in the word, and the tribute, too.

And, as we know, the only reason the "antispyware zealots" came about is precisely because of the online shitstorm you people created when you realised it was easier to make a cheap buck unethically, rather than straight down the middle.

You going to police yourselves? Please! How long has that one been trotted out?

You are incapable, or unwilling, to do so. You failed in a manner near Biblical in its proportions, using the "hey, we're a young, developing industry" as the benchmark excuse for every month that has gone by with yet more crappy installs to deal with and write about.

Is it just me, or can I think of plenty of "young industries" that (for some strange reason) didn't quickly sink into a mire of sleaze, corruption and ruined lives?

Old, old, old. Here is a big can of old. Enjoy it. Savour the taste.

You made people like Ben Edelman. The way you highlighted to the crappier people in the world just how easy it was to make money on the cheap ruined lives, and that made me too. No doubt, more will spring up in the near future. The people you are seemingly "at war" with will only continue to swell. And those people will finally stop wailing on you only when the last crappy install has gone the way of the grave. And not a moment before.

Do not demand from us, the trust that you neglected to give to the consumers whose PCs became unusable because of your software.

My advice?

Hurry up and fix your software. Get moving on those un-fiddle-able installers. Get cracking with your less-than-sixty-pages long EULAs. Work out what affiliates to throw off the bridge.

And do it soon.

Because come 2006 - there will be no more excuses, no more apologies, no more praying for a little more time.

In 2006, the clock has run down and the riot is the rhyme of the unheard, no more.

Complaining about Ben Edelman's money trails will be the least of your worries.

I promise.