Live data from Hacker News

How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

by.graffino.com

21–30 of 252 posts

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#21

I'm starting to think that if Google had a service where you could pay $10/$20/whatever, and actually get someone reasonably well informed to read what you're saying and direct your issue to the right person, they'd have another significant revenue stream on their hands ;-)

we can also imagine that the people who get the message get a part of the money.

And the more you pay the more your message is higlighted or promote to these people.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#22
Not providing any meaningful support is Google's business model - you can see them talk about it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU0Z_HAzO3I

> Google estimates that they would need to hire over 20,000 customer service people to deal with 1 query every three years from each customer. So it has decided - as far as possible - to employ zero people and rely on algorithms.

https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/02/googles-customer-contempt-c...

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#23
What you are doing not only violated Facebook's trademark (good luck calling it fair use), but it's also against Facebook's ToS. They have actively gone after extension authors who alter the Facebook experience and even deactivated their accounts.

Rightly or wrongly, when you sign up to a service you are bound by the conditions they set out. In this case, making an extension to block advertising is probably not going to end well for you.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#24
post #3

I'm starting to think that if Google had a service where you could pay $10/$20/whatever, and actually get someone reasonably well informed to read what you're saying and direct your issue to the right person, they'd have another significant revenue stream on their hands ;-)

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

My guess here is that the subset of users who would be willing to pay a monthly subscription is strongly correlated with the subset that advertisers are interested in targeting most. If a site got say 10% of users to pay a subscription, their value to advertisers - and hence their advertising revenue - might drop a lot more than 10%, leaving them with a net loss.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#25

> I received an email from Google telling me that my extension violated Facebook’s trademark What did you expect? Any service, not just Google, will shut down apps and extensions for similar reasons. This has nothing to do with > I just don’t think it is worth it to put any amount of effort to build something on a platform that turned out to be so unreliable.

I do agree that any service might honor the takedown request for the registered trademark infringement.

But what the author refers to is completely another issue: the complete lack of support from Google. The extension author complied with the request. Tried to contact several times an only got canned responses. I guess Google doesn't care much about people that develop for their platform. At least that's what I got from the blog post. Therefore, author's conclusion about developing for that platform seens right.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#26
post #3

I'm starting to think that if Google had a service where you could pay $10/$20/whatever, and actually get someone reasonably well informed to read what you're saying and direct your issue to the right person, they'd have another significant revenue stream on their hands ;-)

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

google does not sell your data. this is such a tired canard.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#27
post #10
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

I think there's at least two reasons. With Twitter or Facebook the problem is that they're dependent on network effects so asking for payments from users is out of the question, they would never get to 100s of millions of users that way. With Google search, you may have more of a point, but I guess in the end Procter and Gamble has more money to spend on individual search transactions for ads than the other parties i…

Don't have to charge everybody. There can be a free tier ("pay with your data") and a paid tier ("pay with your wallet")

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#28
post #10
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a larger pattern here. Is there any large B2C web service that's not monetized by selling the users' data (for advertisement targeting etc.)? For example, I would absolutely love to pay a monthly fee to Twitter (say, 3-5€) in exchange for an ad-free, unmodified, chronological timeline. And I would also consider paying something (say, 10€ a month) to Google in exchange for an ad-free search site that does not…

I think there's at least two reasons. With Twitter or Facebook the problem is that they're dependent on network effects so asking for payments from users is out of the question, they would never get to 100s of millions of users that way. With Google search, you may have more of a point, but I guess in the end Procter and Gamble has more money to spend on individual search transactions for ads than the other parties i…

Over the years I've seen the reaction to a lot of those "Facebook is going to start charging money!" fake posts and it's very negative. I can't imagine the outrage that would ensue if twitter or Facebook offered a "pro" experience. People don't respond well to free things becoming paid, even if the free version remains largely the same.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thus far, I accomplish that via: Duck, Duck, Go; NoScript; Privacy Badger; and uBlock Origin. Its silly to need to do all that, but it works well for me.

uBlock cannot give me a pristine timeline; Twitter's algorithms still mess with the content ordering. It's not just about ads, it's about how a tool's design is poisoned by the need for maximal ad revenue. As far as DuckDuckGo goes, I would really love to use them regularly. DDG is even the default search engine on my notebook, but I find myself going to Google in the second step about 90% of the time because DDG's r…

I love DDG in theory. In practice, I append !g to about half of my searches because the results aren't good enough. Say what you will about the privacy concerns, but Google knowing I frequently search for programming stuff makes finding other programming stuff a much easier process.

Re: How Google obliterated my 4 year old Chrome extension featuring 24k+ users

#30
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can pay less then 10€ a month to get ad free YouTube and Music. Best money I spend every month.

Great. Now they should offer the same for the search engine.

I think you can? https://contributor.google.com . Not that I’ve tried it - I’m not allowed to in the UK.
Post reply on HN