gregbo (gregbo) wrote,

The blogosphere has been abuzz lately with discussion of Google's release of the methods they use to determine which clicks are "invalid".

There has been other commentary from Matt Cutts and Shuman Ghosemajumder (who was a Sloanie, btw). The latter contains a key admission, something not explicitly stated by Google before (at least from what I've heard and seen):

"So what is our overall "click fraud rate"? As noted in the diagram in the story, it is virtually impossible to know the intent of every click. However, we can do a very effective job using statistical techniques to detect potentially malicious behavior, and the total number of invalid clicks we detect – whether for suspected malicious or non-malicious intent – is in the single digit percentages. So third-party estimates which say that click fraud is 15% or higher appear to clearly be substantial exaggerations."

While this statement is plausible on the surface, it still underscores that the actual amount of click fraud is still unknown, and will continue to be when the determination is made using logs, clickstreams, etc.

  • (no subject)

    The following are comments I sent to the authors of World IPv6 Day Call to Arms, a draft that makes some recommendations to systems and network…

  • (no subject)

    I found another company, Terremark (which Verizon recently announced they intend to buy), that offers a cloud computing service called vCloud…

  • playing around with cloud computing

    Despite not working (for pay), I'm still very busy. The past couple of days, I've been learning how to use Amazon Web Services – in…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment