211–220 of 252 posts
I'm really surprised this got so much traction..., I didn't submit this to HN. Baffled that so many users went trough roughly the same experience. (I'm the original author)
Great project - is this in a repo we can fork?
I can't release it in the form it is now. I'm really ashamed of the code I wrote a few years back :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they told me I was infringing 4 years later... when there are numerous apps in the store doing the same. It's also a cleaner that works only of Facebook. Google reviewed it and approved it 4 years ago. The extension is free. There is no advertising. I don't make any profit. I was never told what to do or how to change it so that my users would still recognize it. Also changing its name in "Cleaner - For Facebook"…
> So they told me I was infringing 4 years later... when there are numerous apps in the store doing the same. This is not a great defense. We know from the trail you presented that someone from FB's legal/compliance team found your extension, not the others, likely due to its visibility and popularity. That doesn't mean the other extensions are in the clear. It just means they weren't on FB's radar. > The extension i…
I specifically said in the article that it's not the takedown I had a problem with. But the total lack of support in solving the issues. If I'm not made aware of the rules, I can't fix anything. They specifically said I had to get back to the original complainant to get my app reinstated. That email address is a black hole. So there's nothing I can do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In your metaphor, the article isn't about why the window broke. It's premise is that once broken, Google makes it impossible to find out how or whether it can be fixed. Chastising the author for breaking it in the first place is neither here nor there.
I'd start by saying characterizing my responses as "chastising" is a bit disingenuous. I find the notion that the extension was removed without any clear reason equally disingenuous. The reasoning was provided in the included email screenshot. It's not a grand leap to suggest that not repeating the precise reasoning for the extension's removal would likely mitigate future action. The OP fundamentally resubmitted the…
I didn't get the clear reasons my extension was taken down. It is a grand leap to what needs to be changed in order for the app to be compliant and in the same time not confusing existing users.
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-custo…
Which is a really good argument for never developing for the Google eco-system. Because you can't afford to invest in a platform where if something goes wrong you're just f*cked.
This person just won the unfortunate lottery that in a large enough sample there has* to be at least one person who gets treated unfairly.
Plus, of course, they are butthurt over the fact that they don't understand how trademark works (I mean… honestly? How could they think that that rename would make it better?). It's not like they didn't get multiple levels of appeals by humans, they just didn't like the answer they got so felt more comfortable blaming automation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd start by saying characterizing my responses as "chastising" is a bit disingenuous. I find the notion that the extension was removed without any clear reason equally disingenuous. The reasoning was provided in the included email screenshot. It's not a grand leap to suggest that not repeating the precise reasoning for the extension's removal would likely mitigate future action. The OP fundamentally resubmitted the…
Actually no. The same extension is OK in the Safari store by using "Cleaner - For Facebook". This is OK according to the law. I didn't get the clear reasons my extension was taken down. It is a grand leap to what needs to be changed in order for the app to be compliant and in the same time not confusing existing users.
The fact that Safari allows it is not some broad-sweeping legal pronouncement. Nor is it proof that they even truly evaluated it more than superficially. It's not even validation that the extension is compliant via Apple's terms. It just means your extension got back in.
Apple could get a takedown notice tomorrow and do the exact same thing. This is clearly a risk of using the Facebook trademark, even if you're doing it in a "fair use" way.
I'm not trying to be rude here, so please don't read it this way. But bluntly, invoking Facebook's name in your extension is kicking the hornet's nest. If Facebook doesn't like it, they will send takedown notices and Apple and Google will assuredly respond to those by suspending extensions. Your beef is still ultimately with Facebook, not Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes sense not to have humans responding about how their site is indexed or removed, because that's pretty much everyone. However, they should really consider hiring support staff for: * Their paying customers * The partners bringing value to their products, typically extension developers and Android app developers
Products that make google money that you have to pay for have some amazing support. Cloud and Adwords being 2 examples. As you go through the sign up flow, they give you a phone number to call if you have any questions. As a software engineer at Google, I have handled a few bugs or issues that originated from customers calling our support lines.
He is selling ads. And he gets lots of support.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some aspects, maybe... in other aspects, they've raised the bar to heights that others can't/won't reach. In a company that has hundreds of products, is that really so hard to believe? Mega successes... mega failures. Still massively successful? Look at Apple. They were at the top with the iPod. Then the iPhone. Then the iPad. Massively successful. Yet they still release turd products like one button mouse, Apple…
> one button mouse Although I have some serious issues with Apple (e.g. iPhone 6 plus), Apple hasn't released a one button mouse in a long time. They all have two buttons, just check the preferences. Frankly, Apple TV is actually a pretty good product since my technophobe Mom can use it for its intended purpose. I still don't like the whole remote policy, but that's a developer thing and frankly Apple really isn't th…
It seems recently like anything inbound to Google goes into /dev/null! A number of us have been trying to get a response regarding Google Apps accounts with Play Music, and we're paying customers. There's no response to the forum https://productforums.google.com/forum/m/?utm_medium=email&u... nor when I put it on Twitter and when a load of us tried direct feedback via the app, that still hasn't got any response. Clea…
Google Express seems to have very good and responsive customer service, so to the extent that this is a real problem at Google, its not everywhere at Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
anecdotally, you can get good support if you're a customer, but there's a big difference between a customer and a user. I've heard (not confirmed personally, just overheard at conferences), that if you spend enough on adwords to register on their radar as a customer, things are easy to get sorted even if they're nowhere adwords related. the big difference is that for the most part, google users/developers/... are not…
With Google, you're not the customer. You're the product.
No, though with many free Google services, each user is a low-volume supplier in a crowded field of similar low-volume suppliers.