Author Topic: Ubuntu will now have Amazon ads pre-installed (Read 17040 times)

Josh · « **on:** September 22, 2012, 08:45 AM »

Amazon shopping results have been integrated into the Unity Dash of Ubuntu 12.10.

The feature comes a day after news that Ubuntu were adding Amazon and Ubuntu One Music web-apps as default items on Unity launcher.

Canonical says that the feature ‘extends what was already introduced in the Music and Video Lenses’ by offering ’a “more suggestions” results category …to searches performed from the home dash.’

The boon for them is that they get a small % cut from every purchase made through the Dash (or the web-app mentioned yesterday), as Oliver Ries explained on the Ubuntu Development mailing list yesterday:

“…if a user clicks the item and purchases it, it will generate affiliate revenue that we can invest back into the project (in a similar way to how we generate revenue from the Firefox search
bar).

We have found affiliate revenue to be a good method of helping us to continue to invest in maturing and growing Ubuntu.”

Source

40hz · « **Reply #1 on:** September 22, 2012, 08:53 AM »

Yes. Maturing and growing Ububtu into the next iOS.

Sorry. Mark Shuttleworth still sucks.

mahesh2k · « **Reply #2 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:48 AM »

Firefox has ebay and amazon URLs encoded in Search since version 5 onwards, that code is rewritten by canonical. On windows and mac, firefox takes the revenue but on ubuntu canonical grabs the affiliate revenue. I am sure each of the linux distro have their own aff code in searchbar. So I don't know integration like that makes any big news.

f0dder · « **Reply #3 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM »

On a somewhat related topic: am I the only one that purposefully removes affiliate links from URLs before purchasing things, unless I deliberately want to support a particular person?

wraith808 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:52 AM »

On a somewhat related topic: am I the only one that purposefully removes affiliate links from URLs before purchasing things, unless I deliberately want to support a particular person?
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)

Nope.

40hz · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:17 AM »

Nope.

Fred Nerd · « **Reply #6 on:** September 22, 2012, 07:46 PM »

And remove the the link tracker extension when reposting a link

mouser · « **Reply #7 on:** September 22, 2012, 08:44 PM »

Nope.

Though I have to confess, I'm not sure exactly why I do -- seems like it would hurt no one to give some affiliate credits to someone.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #8 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:34 PM »

I'm going to hedge my wording here in case I am blundering, but I think at least some links aren't just sending affiliate info, they're sending identifiable user info of various kinds along with it.

(Peeks out from under tinfoil hat, wating for the time to verify it with facts and so remove the hat.)

wraith808 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:45 PM »

I'm going to hedge my wording here in case I am blundering, but I think at least some links aren't just sending affiliate info, they're sending identifiable user info of various kinds along with it.

(Peeks out from under tinfoil hat, wating for the time to verify it with facts and so remove the hat.)
-TaoPhoenix (September 22, 2012, 09:34 PM)

Affiliate links send the affiliate info of the linker. Sort of like those links that people send with Dropbox.

I should clarify my response also- if someone is forthcoming that the link has affiliate info, then if it's useful and I buy something as a direct result of the link, then I won't remove. If someone is less than forthcoming, or I buy something that is not a direct result of the link... bye bye affiliate link!

40hz · « **Reply #10 on:** September 22, 2012, 11:28 PM »

I liked how the folks on the Linux Action Show handled affiliate links. They point them out on the bottom of their webpage during the show and ask the listeners/viewers to consider using them next time they buy something from one of the companies listed. They further explain how it benefits them, why they do it, and how it doesn't have any effect on the price you pay.

wraith808 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 22, 2012, 11:36 PM »

^ That's cool. That's what I try to do whenever I use affiliate links.

Renegade · « **Reply #12 on:** September 23, 2012, 12:23 AM »

On a somewhat related topic: am I the only one that purposefully removes affiliate links from URLs before purchasing things, unless I deliberately want to support a particular person?
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)

Depends. If the site is a spammy, canned, site - yes. If the site is actually doing something other than copy & paste and has real unique value - no. I have no problems supporting those that actually DO something. But I can't stand the spammy crowd of affiliate marketers. I've always found affiliate marketing distasteful. (Irrationally so I admit.) Marketing/selling purely for money is simply repellent to me, whereas marketing/selling because you actually BELIEVE in something gets me on board. It's purely about judging intent for me -- irrational, and error prone I know... but...

SeraphimLabs · « **Reply #13 on:** September 23, 2012, 09:27 AM »

Ubuntu is very rapidly moving away from the Linux ideals. I have not recommended them for some time, but with developments like this I probably will start advising people using it to go to Debian.

Debian is the root of Ubuntu anyway, but where Ubuntu has given in to commercial interests and popular bloatware, Debian remains pure GPL and excludes as much closed-source and privately licensed code as possible.

f0dder · « **Reply #14 on:** September 23, 2012, 11:19 AM »

I should clarify my response also- if someone is forthcoming that the link has affiliate info, then if it's useful and I buy something as a direct result of the link, then I won't remove. If someone is less than forthcoming, or I buy something that is not a direct result of the link... bye bye affiliate link!
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:45 PM)

Yeah, the same here - I don't mind the affiliate links when people plainly state they're included.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** September 23, 2012, 11:25 AM »

^Seems to be the consensus on that. I don't think anybody has a problem with somebody making money off an affiliate deal. Just so long as they're up front about it.

Tuxman · « **Reply #16 on:** September 23, 2012, 01:54 PM »

Interesting. I wonder what would happen if Microsoft did that.

wraith808 · « **Reply #17 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:14 PM »

Interesting. I wonder what would happen if Microsoft did that.
-Tuxman (September 23, 2012, 01:54 PM)

You forgot the sarcastic smiley

Tuxman · « **Reply #18 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:14 PM »

No, I really wonder.

wraith808 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:15 PM »

No, I really wonder.
-Tuxman (September 23, 2012, 02:14 PM)

Don't we already know? There would be an uproar that would involve lawyers making a lot more money, nothing getting done, other than in the end, it would have to be removed.

Tuxman · « **Reply #20 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:18 PM »

Oh, right.

Canonical seems to make a difference, according to the comments above.

wraith808 · « **Reply #21 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:32 PM »

Canonical seems to make a difference, according to the comments above.
-Tuxman (September 23, 2012, 02:18 PM)

To some people, the use of funds makes the difference. Not to me... I call a spade a spade, and the ends don't justify the means.

Tuxman · « **Reply #22 on:** September 23, 2012, 02:35 PM »

Canonical makes mistakes all the time, people still stick to them. Sigh.

IainB · « **Reply #23 on:** September 23, 2012, 06:18 PM »

Interesting comments, and surprisingly like-minded too!

On a somewhat related topic: am I the only one that purposefully removes affiliate links from URLs before purchasing things, unless I deliberately want to support a particular person?
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)

------------------------------

And remove the the link tracker extension when reposting a link
-Fred Nerd (September 22, 2012, 07:46 PM)

------------------------------

Though I have to confess, I'm not sure exactly why I do -- seems like it would hurt no one to give some affiliate credits to someone.
-mouser (September 22, 2012, 08:44 PM)

------------------------------

...I think at least some links aren't just sending affiliate info, they're sending identifiable user info of various kinds along with it...
-TaoPhoenix (September 22, 2012, 09:34 PM)

------------------------------

...I've always found affiliate marketing distasteful...
-Renegade (September 23, 2012, 12:23 AM)

------------------------------

+1 - a bit like @f0dder, I always at least consider whether to remove affiliate links from URLs on the rare occasion that I might be using them to purchase things. The reason I do that is to protect my anonymity as much as possible. For example, the affiliate links could be used to build up a profile of your browsing/purchasing habits and interests. Marketers pay for that information, because it is so useful in that regard.
+1 - like @Fred Nerd, I try to always remove any link tracker extension when reposting a link.
+1 - a bit like @mouser, I now do it automatically without thinking, but that's on the basis of a deliberate blanket approach. I prefer risk avoidance ("better safe than sorry") and not wishing to waste time thinking about the merits/risks of each individual case.
+1 - like @TaoPhoenix, I work on the basis of avoiding the risk that some links aren't sending only affiliate info, but could also be sending identifiable/tracking user info of various kinds along with it (how would you know for sure in each case?).
+1 - like @Renegade, I generally find affiliate marketing to be distasteful. As a marketing practice, it does not have much to commend it. It is opportunistic and random, and seems to push people into the desperate mindset of followers, slaves and the unempowered. (Refer also "Competing for the Future", by Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad.)

Mind you, I suppose we could all be quite wrong about this...

Bit of a long read, but here's some interesting and relevant background that got me thinking more about Internet privacy/anonymity, etc.: Junkbusters (Dr. Jason Catlett) Testimony Before the Senate Commerce Committee on 2001-07-11.doc

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #24 on:** September 23, 2012, 06:49 PM »

Ubuntu is very rapidly moving away from the Linux ideals. I have not recommended them for some time, but with developments like this I probably will start advising people using it to go to Debian.

Debian is the root of Ubuntu anyway, but where Ubuntu has given in to commercial interests and popular bloatware, Debian remains pure GPL and excludes as much closed-source and privately licensed code as possible.
-SeraphimLabs (September 23, 2012, 09:27 AM)

"Pure, unprocessed Debian" strikes me like a Ginger root. Ginger is tasty, but in its native form, the root takes a lot of work!

The beauty of Linux is that there are tons of options which are Debian Not-Ubuntu. Fortunately in one sense, all of this junk became tangential for me a year or so ago when my cheap linux test box simply stopped working at one of the updates, probably some driver they didn't bother to continue using.

So though I have lost interest mostly since then, I found a couple of sub-derivatives, etc.