Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don’t Mess with The Google

dansdeals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 504 posts

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#41

Post by duaneb »

taurath wrote: post #23

Pretty incredible - especially with how little that a hardware product purchase has to do with a user's data. Imagine for a moment that google required people to have an account to access all their services - that they have the ability to cut you off arbitrarily across ALL their services for a TOS violation should scare anyone. Imagine if facebook cut your account and thereby ties to many of your friends and acquaint…

> Imagine if facebook cut your account and thereby ties to many of your friends and acquaintances for promoting a competing ad company?

This is very imaginable. Facebook has never attempted to be privacy or user friendly; DO NOT USE IT. You are the only product they have of value.

In general, do not use third party login for anything personal you care about. It's not a password; it's nothing you control.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#42

Post by Mithaldu »

relics443 wrote: post #22

Just curious here, but why are people outraged over this? They clearly violated Google's policy, and there were repercussions. Those rules are there to protect Google; perhaps their only legal recourse to cover themselves after a rule violation is to suspend the account?

They could've contacted people with a warning first. Act like actual humans. A company acting like a pure machine towards humans is not acceptable.

Besides that: Google is digitally killing people here for doing something whose damage to Google is not obvious to a layperson, and honestly not even obvious to me.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#43

Post by relics443 »

addicted wrote: post #31
relics443 wrote: post #22

Just curious here, but why are people outraged over this? They clearly violated Google's policy, and there were repercussions. Those rules are there to protect Google; perhaps their only legal recourse to cover themselves after a rule violation is to suspend the account?

What if your landlord cut off access to your apartment, and everything inside, because you happened to have 3 guests visit and stay with you this month, instead of the 2 allowed by the lease? Would that be okay with you? And that wouldn't even be as bad as this, because a lease is a far more legally applicable document unlike TOS's which no one reads. Further, at least your violation there is related to your apartmen…

A. Landlords can most certainly terminate your lease because of that. They can't throw you out immediately because of tenant protection laws, and they have to let you get your belongings once you're evicted.

B. ToS are just as legally binding as a lease (provided they are presented in the right manner, which is how Google presents them). No one cares of you actually read them or not. As soon as you check the box that said you read and agree to them, you're legally bound to follow them.

C. No one ever said that repercussions have to match the violation. As I said, perhaps suspending the account is the only way Google can comply or protect themselves legally.

D. Google has no interest in attacking anyone. They simply follow the protocol they set for this occurrence.

The common denominator here seems to be that people are getting outraged that they can't break the rules and get away with it.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#44

Post by relics443 »

Mithaldu wrote: post #42
relics443 wrote: post #22

Just curious here, but why are people outraged over this? They clearly violated Google's policy, and there were repercussions. Those rules are there to protect Google; perhaps their only legal recourse to cover themselves after a rule violation is to suspend the account?

They could've contacted people with a warning first. Act like actual humans. A company acting like a pure machine towards humans is not acceptable. Besides that: Google is digitally killing people here for doing something whose damage to Google is not obvious to a layperson, and honestly not even obvious to me.

Perhaps they needed to suspend the account immediately to cover themselves legally? Besides most things at Google are automated. It's likely that a human didn't actually press the button that suspended the accounts.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#45

Post by basch »

djsumdog wrote: post #26
vilhelm_s wrote: post #8

This really seems like it needs to be regulated in law. For telephone companies, there are rules about when they may disconnect you, e.g. the Arizona Utilities Division write > f I am unable to pay my entire bill, what can I do to maintain local dial tone? > The Arizona Administrative Code specifically states that a telephone company may not disconnect a customer for failure to pay an unregulated portion of their bil…

And with e-mail, that's often a means of authentication. Many services won't change your e-mail without sending an e-mail to your prior service. You can essentially get locked out of your Steam account.

exactly. if you pay for a service and google or facebook are your authentication, you are locked out of the third party services you pay for.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#46

Post by Mithaldu »

relics443 wrote: post #44
Mithaldu wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could've contacted people with a warning first. Act like actual humans. A company acting like a pure machine towards humans is not acceptable. Besides that: Google is digitally killing people here for doing something whose damage to Google is not obvious to a layperson, and honestly not even obvious to me.

Perhaps they needed to suspend the account immediately to cover themselves legally? Besides most things at Google are automated. It's likely that a human didn't actually press the button that suspended the accounts.

I don't care about technical justifications, i was talking about morality and humanity. Google is still a company composed of humans, but a few people in there seem to lack a certain amount humanity.

Please do keep in mind: They digitally killed people here in something that looks like pure and petty spite from Google. Some of these people might have relied on their gmail account for their livelihood. (Think remote freelancers, etc.)

You can also look at it like this: The punishment is wildly out of proportion to the crime.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#47

Post by chrisper »

el_benhameen wrote: post #20
throwaway76543 wrote: post #15

I recently made a decision to stop running my own mail server, figured it was long, long overdue to pay someone to handle my email for me. Stories like this are why I didn't pick gmail for this service, which would have otherwise been my first choice.

May I ask who you chose?

I am considering signing up for O365. Not sure if this has the same fallacies as Gmail though.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#48

Post by relics443 »

morganvachon wrote: post #37
relics443 wrote: post #22

Just curious here, but why are people outraged over this? They clearly violated Google's policy, and there were repercussions. Those rules are there to protect Google; perhaps their only legal recourse to cover themselves after a rule violation is to suspend the account?

Only speaking for myself, but I'm put off because Google is punishing its users with a digital death sentence because they sold a phone that was originally bought from Google at full retail price . Yes, it's against the service agreement for the Fi phone service, but at most Google should only be allowed to suspend the user's Fi account, not irretrievably delete their entire Google identity. It's retaliation and puni…

It's not retaliation or punishment. It's process.

At the end of the day, rules were broken. If you can't handle the repercussions then don't break the rules. Pretty simple.

Re: Don’t Mess with The Google

#50

Post by linkregister »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #10
vilhelm_s wrote: post #8

This really seems like it needs to be regulated in law. For telephone companies, there are rules about when they may disconnect you, e.g. the Arizona Utilities Division write > f I am unable to pay my entire bill, what can I do to maintain local dial tone? > The Arizona Administrative Code specifically states that a telephone company may not disconnect a customer for failure to pay an unregulated portion of their bil…

Willing to bet if any of them were Google Fi or Google Fiber customers, their phones would be cut off as well. Of course, much of their fight with AT&T over pole attachment rights has been Google's unwillingness to be classified as a "telecom"[0]. I suspect Google is very unwilling to be held to these sorts of legal responsibilities. "Basically, the current regulations require companies with utility poles in the publ…

Wouldn't Google be able to set up a wholly-owned subsidiary to be the designated telecom in Texas? That's how the ride-sharing companies do it in order to insulate the parent companies from having transportation law apply to their headquarters.

I think it's indicative of more than just Google being unwilling to be held to the legal responsibilities; it appears that even their Fiber arm doesn't want them as well.

Post reply on HN