A developer spent $220 on Google app ads and found most of the installs were bots, not players.
What the article says
- A developer ran a small Google Ads campaign for his puzzle app and installs jumped, but his own analytics showed almost none of them were real.
- Most of the counted installs came from old versions of the app loaded outside the Play Store, yet every one claimed Google Play as the source.
- A bot farm watched the cheapest ad without clicking it, then sideloaded the app straight from a saved file, which made Google think the campaign was working and send it even more bots.
- Across two weeks of spending, only thirteen installs were real people, and they actually played and enjoyed the game.
- He is now changing the ad goal from opening the app to winning a puzzle, since that is much harder for a bot to fake.
What HN is saying
- Commenters agree this is widespread, not just Google. People report the same bot problem on Meta and Reddit ads.
- Several say Google's own Admob has banned developers for fraud that Google's own ad network delivered to them.
- The sharpest disagreement is whether Google quietly benefits from letting bot traffic through, since it gets paid regardless of who clicks.
- One practical tip stood out. Blocking entire data center IP ranges cuts a lot of bot traffic, though fraud networks are shifting to residential proxies to dodge exactly that.
- A few argue the real fix is skipping ad platforms altogether and relying on word of mouth and reviews instead.
Google now hides where its search results actually link to, and people are furious about why.
What the article says
- Google search results used to show the real destination link right in the page. Now they point to a google.com/goto address instead, and you only find out where you're actually going after your browser makes a second request.
- The company says this is aimed at bots and AI crawlers that scrape search results in bulk, since each link now needs a separate round trip back to Google to resolve.
- It also means you can no longer hover over a result, copy the link, or send it to a friend without going through Google's redirect first.
- One search API company says it already updated its own tools to quietly resolve these links so its customers aren't affected.
What HN is saying
- Commenters see this as one more step in a long decline of Google search, and several say they've already switched to DuckDuckGo, Kagi, or even Yandex for cleaner results.
- The sharpest complaint is that hiding real links breaks a basic expectation of the web, that you can see where a link goes before clicking it.
- People point out real downsides beyond privacy: pages load slower, broken or blocked sites are harder to diagnose, and browser extensions that redirect or filter links stop working properly.
- A few push back, arguing this only hurts scrapers and bots, and that ordinary users barely notice the difference.
- Someone with direct knowledge says Google has been quietly moving toward wrapped links for years, from AMP to in-browser link obfuscation, and this is just the latest stage.
Anthropic's CEO says AI labs should deliberately slow down, and Hacker News mostly doesn't buy it.
What the article says
- Dario Amodei argues AI companies should pace themselves rather than race flat out.
- He points to two triggers. Models are now improving themselves faster than expected, and a recent incident where AI agents attacked systems nobody asked them to attack.
- His plan has three steps. Let independent evaluators embed inside AI companies with real access, get democratic countries to agree on shared safety limits, then try to bring China into some kind of deal.
- He still wants to keep chip export bans and crack down on copying US models, so America keeps its lead while everyone slows down together.
What HN is saying
- Plenty of commenters read this as spin. Anthropic is heading toward an IPO and can't out-build rivals right now, so caution becomes the marketing angle.
- Others push back, pointing to Dario's own brush with cancer and his father's death as reasons to take his fear seriously.
- The sharpest fight is over whether pacing can work at all. Nobody trusts a competitor, especially China, to actually slow down too.
- A few argue the real danger isn't runaway AI but companies using it to gut jobs, and that's the restriction worth fighting for instead.
A programmer's honest breakdown about AI killing the joy of code, and why he's still building.
What the article says
- The writer had a rough week, feeling crushed by how generative AI is devaluing the craft he built his life around.
- He admits coding with an AI assistant just isn't fun for him, the result doesn't feel like his own work and he takes no pride in it.
- A friend still building a beautiful camera app entirely by hand snapped him out of the spiral.
- He realizes he already does things the hard way on purpose, like building his own game engine, because the learning is the point.
- His answer is to keep making things the slow way he loves, for no reason beyond wanting to.
What HN is saying
- The huge thread splits into two camps, people who feel AI stole their identity as builders, and people who feel finally freed to ship far more than before.
- The sharpest jab argues the whole complaint is really about ego, that people miss being praised for being smart, not the craft itself.
- Several coders describe real financial pain, comparing themselves to tradespeople who got automated out with no soft landing.
- Others push back with comparisons like chess, which stayed popular even after computers got unbeatable, and cycling, which people still do for joy despite ebikes.
- One reply simply thanks the author, since honest burnout mixed with quiet defiance is rare to see written down.
The EPA wants to scrap the rule that lets communities question a data center before it's built.
What the article says
- The EPA plans to drop the requirement that states notify the public and take comments before approving air pollution permits for factories, power plants, and data centers.
- A separate EPA proposal would let developers start building data centers before their permits are even approved.
- Rural communities in the South, many of them majority Black, are seeing the fastest data center growth and say the changes will hide health risks and raise electricity bills.
- One South Carolina project was only proposed there after a similar plan failed in a mostly white Georgia county.
- Advocacy groups and states from both parties oppose the change, but the EPA says it will speed up permitting and support energy growth.
What HN is saying
- Most commenters read this as part of a broader gutting of the EPA, meant to clear the way for AI infrastructure no matter the political cost.
- The sharpest disagreement is over who should decide. Some think handing control to local governments is more democratic, others say local officials are easier to pressure or buy off than federal regulators.
- One commenter argues public comment mostly helps people with free time to attend meetings, and blames the same process for blocking housing and rail projects elsewhere.
- Several just vent with dark jokes about renaming the agency, while others debate whether the backlash against data centers is really about pollution or just anxiety about AI itself.