New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Where to buy dirt cheap traffic?
What I am looking for:
- Super cheap
- Able to execute javascript
- Diverse geography. As many countries as possible.
- Millions of executions per day
I don't care if its bots, servers, popup traffic...
Basically I want as many browsers as possible to execute my javascript. The JS is very lightweight and not visible to the user. It runs a few 2kb downloads in the background and records the performance, that's it.
I could pay for a big website to add the JS or buy some traffic from ad companies. But I am not sure where to find either of them.
If anyone has any suggestions let me know.
Comments
Sigh, no.
Jingling if it still works
Doesn't execute javascript.
Cheap popups/popunders should get the job done, but since that javascript monero mining nonsence, I think even popups should have gotten more expensive.
Feel free to add my coinhive.js in the mix.
This is exactly what I'm looking for as well in order to optimize the network, was just preparing a blog post about it, so this might be convenient
don't help these fucking propaganda retards. And then you will not surprised because of fake elections, fake reviews, fake comments, fake the world in the entire internet.
Is your CDN in the signature is a method to do such illegal things? Are you attaching fake-js scripts to real customer HTML pages for making a dirty things time to time? I know dozens of examples of fake things around youtube which comes from legal websites with attached JS script like that, or via advertising banners which is hosted on foreign servers. People visiting a normal site, and the site doing dirty job on youtube / different sites while people do not even notice that they made a dislike, or wrote a review at youtube while they were browsing the internet by such sites.
Shame on such people.
If you really need a traffic just for testing purposes to generate loading or custom things, there are already many LEGAL ways to do it. But for you important real users, that's why I'm starting to talk in such manner because with 99% warranty I know for what is it for you, no expectations, I have few friends of mine which did the same shit, one of them in jail right now. And this is very dangerous and bad.
If it's for a good cause, I can run it on about 20k-40k uniques/day for a reasonable price, assuming it's safe/sandboxable
Not cheap but good - https://loader.io
Just because your friend did shady shit and is now in jail doesn't mean other people will inject weird things. By this logic any website requiring a user to put a JavaScript on such as Google Analytics, Hotjar, conversion optimizers, support desks etc. would be bad people.
@jimaek clearly stated that he wants to do performance tests for his service and so did I. If anyone wanted to inject shady things he wouldn't exactly be asking people.
Real world performance testing is hard. You can run benchmarks from thousands of servers and they will never result in the same results as an actual web user, but asking users directly to host a script (which is what I'm planning to do) is a burden for them, so what's wrong with paying a high traffic website to help out with their existing user base as well as having an extra source of income for them?
Exactly what @BunnySpeed said.
I already have a network of sites that can generate me 10-20 million tests per day. But I am looking to grow it to 50million and more.
There is no tracking or cookies set, no abuse or anything illegal, the js checks the performance of some of my endpoints and then sends me the speed in ms. Thats it.
Plus the collected data will be made public.
Right now I am thinking about getting in contact with adult sites and adult ad companies in case they would be interested in something like that for a super low price.
But I still wanted to hear opinions and suggestions on what is the best course of action and how much do you think it would cost.
Check pagesurfers (google it) for alternatives
You;re going to mine some crypto currency with script similar to coinhive.com.
@TheKiller I am not an idiot, please stop with this.
The deal would be B2B and I am ready to sign a contract to protect any website using my js.
Hey dumbass, CoinHive 1) asks for permission now and 2) just about every adblocker on the planet blocks it now.
Edit: who would waste their time writing another script to mine crypto?
Oh trust me, you can run coinhive without the permission thing.
How dumb are you to not know what coinhive and other crypto scripts do? See recent malware, running on UK/US government's and many other websites without any permission. See again and come back with a valid argument.
How? You can limit the CPU usage per tab...
Yes, but not everyone knows how to do it.
+1
He runs a really large CDN and you think he’s going to pull a quick one...
(emphasis mine)
That's the point I don't like. Seems to translate to "abuses users resources without their knowledge, let alone consent". And no, "but it's tiny" is no justification just like "but I only stole 2 pennies from them" is no justification.
Please note that I do not say that the code will do evil things or that you have evil things in mind. But still, my resources are mine - not yours.
I am not forcing it on anyone. If a site owner wants to help and make some money they can add it, if not then thats fine.
Its the same as adding banner ads or social scripts. They load a bunch of js but sites allow them because the site owners feel those scripts have value.
lowendtalk.com loads so much random marketing js its impressive, but people still use it. My code is much lighter than most of that loaded on this site.
But that's not the point here. I just wanted some suggestions as to where I should look for such use case
Sure, one can look at it like that, however ads are something the user can see and hence know about or even avoid a given site with, say, too many or blinking ads. And that's real, that happens; I've quite often seen links accompanied by warnings like "careful. Lots of ads". Plus, I assume, that the script (not being an ad, after all) is designed to not be detected by ad blockers. And let me guess, there is no opt-out available either.
I understand your pov but as far as I'm concerned, I'll disable their shit as well as is possible and I'd warmly welcome an even tougher legal stance of eu authorities. Turn it as you like but fact is that this js is abusing users resources without consent and the user doesn't get anything for it, not even indirectly.
If you ever visited https://www.airfrance.com and thousands of other websites your browser did exactly what I want to do. Their website is running Cedexis's benchmark code.
Anyway this argument is pointless.
@Zen I agree. I will just have to email people with my offer. Even 1-2 big websites would be a big success.
@Zen
If we disagree, no problem, but it seems that you do not even get my point. I'll make it clearer:
When I surf to a site or when I walk into a supermarket I do have an expectation and that expectation is the frame of reference (well noted, I'm not talking about some crazy guys weird expectation but what can be referred to as "a normal grown up person"). In fact, that is even found in diverse laws in many countries.
Well noted, that expectation does include a limited amount of not directly asked for things like, e.g. visual and audio stimuli designed to stimulate customers to purchase. So much, one could say, is part of modern life. The important point, though, is that those actions are a) perceivable, and b) within reasonable limits.
The problem some here seem to have is that they think "I have good reasons to do what I do" is equal to "what I do is OK". That, however, is (sometimes) not the case.
The normal user is used to ads; they are part of the normal users expectation. Using his resources in a hidden way, though, and particularly in a way that doesn't give him anything is deception, a con. And illegal or at the very least very questionable in quite some jurisdictions.
Another point is that one that you can simply test by driving it further. Your point that the people who run a web site must somehow recover their expenses is true - but not without limits. Test: If your were right and that was the only relevant factor, those people might as well abuse your system for mining, or hey, they might even steal your car and sell it. Obviously that's nonsense and there are limits to what they can do to recover their expenses. advertisements are OK, running arbitrary code on users systems is not.
@Zen
I know that I seem to be very picky and "wasting" attention to stolen microseconds.
But: Assume we said that that's OK. How, with what arguments would you then keep me (as the owner of a site) from abusing your machine for mining or from running not 1 "tiny script" but 10 or 100 or 1000? Or, for that matter from 100 big scripts?
That's why the law says that stealing is criminal, no matter whether a penny or a million. Of course the amount, the damage done, makes a difference and hence the punishment is different - but stealing is still stealing. Same goes for "oh, but it's just a tiny script!".
Counter-proposal: Don't do it secretly, do it openly! Serve a small image with a link to a site behind it where people find information, something like "This is project web stats. We use a tiny script to collect anonymous data used to build statistics and up to date web maps with fine geographical granularity which we hope may help to make the internet better and faster".
So if I put a chair on the streetwalk and you have to walk around it that's stealing your time? Seems that you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. So if a site loads a dead CSS file by accident that's wasting your CPU, that's illegal as well? After all, you wasted 0.00000000001$ in electricity to render the non-working CSS file.
EDIT: I do see where you're aiming at, but I don't think that's the case here. it's not causing harm to the user, it's not taking any personal information from the user, it is not in any way affecting the user in any measurable amount. If the website decides to put on a notice, that's their responsibility, not to the one providing the testing script.
Nice attempt to paint me as the weirdo. But fact is that stealing a penny (or a micropenny if those existed) is criminal just as is stealing a million.
Moreover, where's the line? Is stealing 1 penny OK? and 10? or 1$? or 100$, why not? Also, you make untenable assumptions wrt the users system. Maybe he isn't using a 64-bit quad core but a weak old phone and your "tiny script" isn't consuming "virtually no resources"?
But there's something else that I find hard to accept, namely your nonchalant one sided ignorance. You fucking ONLY see your side and them users shall shut the fuck up and eat whatever you feel like serving. Like that "recovering web site costs" BULLSHIT! The truth is that most of the crap does fucking not have any worth that would make users pay - that's why you fucking find other ways to monetize the crap in the first place.
Moreover it's not pure benevolence that drives those web sites nor are users just cost factors. For a start without users you could smear your content on toilet paper. You NEED users, simple as that. So much so that quite a few of you even pay for users and for attracting them.
I have a simple message for you and your pals: We've had enough of that crap. We don't like to be the fucking product (as in "you are not really a user. You are the product!").
You can learn that lesson the friendly way or you can learn it because we sue and hack the living shit out of you.
Edit (after yours):
Just as I said. Fucking sheer ignorance and arrogance. So YOU judge what's causing harm to the user? How about letting the user decide that? After all it's HIS/HER system, not yours.
Cute. The "I only sell poison gas to my buyers. It's their responsibility to not kill people with it" excuse...
But you are right to a degree. "to a degree" only because a) you fucking well know that many lowlife customers don't care a fuck. They would also gladly put cyanide in their pages if it was possible and if you payed them for it, and b) because you didn't create the thingy in a way that it isn't noticed by 99.99% of the surfers by coincidence but for a reason and not a nice one.
Don't get me wrong, I am aware that it's not just fine to do whatever you want as long as it's "small enough", just try to don't paint this as stealing from the user, which it's clearly not. Then sue all the websites who don't optimize their images well enough for your liking as well. It's just a very bad argument.
From a users perspective, the only issue I see is that the website is doing something you would not normally expect. It's not harming you, not stealing from you, nor tracking you. And yes, 99.9999% of the people would not care if they downloaded a 2kb file and a very simple explanation somewhere on the page would almost surely satisfy the 0.00001% that would.
Why I said it was the websites responsibility is because you already assumed that any website using this would not have anything written on it and just did it in secret. I would definitely strongly agree with putting up a message somewhere explaining what it does and why. Just in case someone wonders what a strange 2kb file download is and why it's useful for him as the user so that the website will be able to increase the performance and load times. But obviously, the "weight" of the notification might also be proportional to the "damage". But you're just blowing things out of proportions and assuming things.