Looking at this from another lense, think the reason why so much moderation is automated is that these companies do Human Ops (might be the wrong term) where essentially it's important to employees mental health not to be working on menial moderation duties. So to improve the quality of employees working life they use bots to do the same job. Now moderation seems to be automateable but could a bot do customer service…
Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
151–160 of 336 posts
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#152I hear a lot of people complain they got falsely banned by some automated process. But automatic processes are easy to game, so just do what the spammers likely do, slightly edit the app, re-upload using another account and IP, etc, repeat. I'm sad every time I install an Android app, thinking how much crap/spyware it will install on my device ... Android should allow other "app stores", just like you can have differ…
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#153Can we sue Google when they do things like this? No single entity should wield this much power. And we should rewrite the laws to make this so. Google and Apple wanted to be in the role of gatekeeper, so they should be beholden to the apps on their platform. We had a web where developers were in control of their own deployment. Everything was decentralized and required responsibility and diligence. Now the power is o…
>No single entity should wield this much power. And we should rewrite the laws to make this so. No single entity, except the laws of course ;)
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine you started a really cool walled garden, invited everybody over, and they all enjoy it. Then you kick out a few trolls, and one of them thinks that the government should come in and forcibly allow the trolls back in. It's my garden, my choice. You are still allowed to publish your app on the web.
If you kicked out African Americans would you say it's your garden, your choice?
Monopolies are subject to restrictions on their operation specifically to protect competition. Unfortunately, around the world over the past 30 years, monopoly regulation has been sadly lacking, except in the EU.
Google could be judged as a monopoly provider of operating system and application services to mobile phone manufacturers. Apple supplies iOS only to its own hardware.
As such, google could be restrained but only in terms of how it deals with the phone manufacturers, not their customers.
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can't mobile follow the same model as desktop?
The desktop distribution model was awful. I wasted many many hours in the past cleaning crapware from family PCs.
edit: Its ofcourse a difficult subject, like with your parents getting too old to drive and not recognizing it, but after all not a technical but a societal problem.
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#156Can we sue Google when they do things like this? No single entity should wield this much power. And we should rewrite the laws to make this so. Google and Apple wanted to be in the role of gatekeeper, so they should be beholden to the apps on their platform. We had a web where developers were in control of their own deployment. Everything was decentralized and required responsibility and diligence. Now the power is o…
When there are free and open source alternatives like fdroid, I don't see how the law could force Google to host an app that they don't want to. Google only gatekeeps what they host, not what exists on the platform. I do think there is a case here against apple because they do gatekeep what the user has access to, but people love to fine Google way more than they do apple, even tough apple is infinitely more anticomp…
You could argue that they take advantage of the desire of app developers to access their market, but that's not "anticompetitive". It's unfair, but life wasn't meant to be fair.
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#157From the blog comments: > Good luck man. I had an app removed because someone did a review of it and their review had screenshots of my app and Google banned the app for copyright infringement siting them as the source. No appeal, one strike, never got through to a human. If true that’s laughablly insane.
I don't like these platforms...
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#158I hear a lot of people complain they got falsely banned by some automated process. But automatic processes are easy to game, so just do what the spammers likely do, slightly edit the app, re-upload using another account and IP, etc, repeat. I'm sad every time I install an Android app, thinking how much crap/spyware it will install on my device ... Android should allow other "app stores", just like you can have differ…
There is nothing stopping you from using other app stores on android. Amazon has their own (amazon underground) and samsung have their own (galaxy store). There are others out there, too!
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
You, still using google for anything, is insane. OK, harsh word, but really, your behaviour is modified by the search results/ads/suggestions you see. Every search you do, leans you to continue using Google in the future, and looking at the web through their eyes.
How is that any different than literally any other way of discovering information?
Academic websites seem to have nearly vanished from the results.
Perhaps the results get better if you pay Google by allowing them cookies, but I think that wasn't necessary 10 years ago either.
So the difference is that in a non-biased library you find many more and interesting sources.
Re: Google removed my ads-free app for “deceptive ads”
#160From the blog comments: > Good luck man. I had an app removed because someone did a review of it and their review had screenshots of my app and Google banned the app for copyright infringement siting them as the source. No appeal, one strike, never got through to a human. If true that’s laughablly insane.