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

Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 288 posts

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#201

Post by obblekk »

thefurdrake wrote: post #13

A more-measured approach would be to just disable your ability to purchase/engage with purchased services/products. Of course, Google is actively motivated to make forcing them to face consequences for mishandling product disputes punishable by complete ostracization from their "ecosystem". On the one hand, this feels like a Surprised Pikachu moment: Of course a chargeback, the final legal method through which you ha…

The final legal method is always court. You can always file a small claims or regular civil case.

I see dozens of people do this weekly against big companies (my company, link in bio) and it does tend to work well because the legal department is generally more motivated to resolve things than customer support. Airlines and car companies are the most common disputes from our data.

That said, you can't force Google or anyone to do business with you. This kind of thing should be regulated for big gate keepers.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#202

Post by kmonsen »

teux wrote: post #187
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So time to play the same old game: does block chain provide any value here that a separate centralized DB doesn't? Let's see, can't you solve the exact same problem by simply having a centralized organization have a database of digital content ownership? Essentially a title record DB? Seems like it. And how does your blockchain solution solve the problem of someone is hacking the game and needs to be banned? Can the…

Disclaimer: this is not my domain. But wouldn’t the blockchain give a decentralised record of ownership that was protected from corruption? If a single entity owns this database, how does it fare against attacks/bad actors, or highly capitalists companies like EA going in and editing it in their best interests. You need a truly good organisation to host that single DB and I’m not sure I tryst any of them at the momen…

The issue is that you need to talk to EA servers to play the game, or whatever the movie is hosted etc, and at that time they can choose to accept whatever token you have. Or they can reject it. So unless the content is also decentralized you are not better off.

Easy example is that nft tokens are decentralized, but the servers hosting the actual pictures are not. So you own the token but the picture itself can go missing.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#203

Post by vineyardmike »

teux wrote: post #187
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So time to play the same old game: does block chain provide any value here that a separate centralized DB doesn't? Let's see, can't you solve the exact same problem by simply having a centralized organization have a database of digital content ownership? Essentially a title record DB? Seems like it. And how does your blockchain solution solve the problem of someone is hacking the game and needs to be banned? Can the…

Disclaimer: this is not my domain. But wouldn’t the blockchain give a decentralised record of ownership that was protected from corruption? If a single entity owns this database, how does it fare against attacks/bad actors, or highly capitalists companies like EA going in and editing it in their best interests. You need a truly good organisation to host that single DB and I’m not sure I tryst any of them at the momen…

Yes, but unless the blockchain stores the actual content, you’re still at the whims of the content provider to serve the content.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#205

Post by [deleted] »

teux wrote: post #187
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So time to play the same old game: does block chain provide any value here that a separate centralized DB doesn't? Let's see, can't you solve the exact same problem by simply having a centralized organization have a database of digital content ownership? Essentially a title record DB? Seems like it. And how does your blockchain solution solve the problem of someone is hacking the game and needs to be banned? Can the…

Disclaimer: this is not my domain. But wouldn’t the blockchain give a decentralised record of ownership that was protected from corruption? If a single entity owns this database, how does it fare against attacks/bad actors, or highly capitalists companies like EA going in and editing it in their best interests. You need a truly good organisation to host that single DB and I’m not sure I tryst any of them at the momen…

[deleted]

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#206

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

patmcc wrote: post #200
r3trohack3r wrote: post #107

Honestly, the top comment is more concerning: https://old.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/zndbku/tifu_by_accide... Account stolen. Obvious fraudulent charges. EA refuses to make it right. Customer rightfully disputes the charges. EA closes their account locking them out of an entire catalogue of content THEY HAD PAID for. This whole “you don’t really own digital content” ruse needs to be popped. A company shouldn’t be abl…

It's totally ridiculous. Imagine Walmart tried to do the same thing with physical goods; say any shoplifter Walmart catches immediately gets all their Walmart purchases taken back. We'd never allow it. Even if they were conflicted of theft, we wouldn't say "oh, sure, Walmart can come in and take your desk". Why have we allowed it with digital goods?

Walmart does do this with physical goods. They treat customers like criminals when they're exiting the store with their paid for property and expect to be able to inspect your belongings.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#207

Post by vineyardmike »

thrashh wrote: post #175
deweller wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a use case that public blockchains could solve for us. Having a decentralized proof of digital rights ownership on a public blockchain could separate the content provider (Amazon / Google / EA) from the actual media they provide by storing it on IPFS or some other decentralized file store. There would need to be a lot of work done to make this happen and big companies would have to get on board. It doesn't se…

IPFS is an open network. Putting it on there would be like putting it on a public FTP server, which would be way simpler Your solution is equivalent to letting customers download their game installer after logging in and giving them a license key to unlock with, something we already can do, except your idea includes 10,000 more steps

> IPFS is an open network. Putting it on there would be like putting it on a public FTP server, which would be way simpler

Not that I agree this is a good idea but IPFS decentralizes storage and provision of the content. A centralized server means the company can still arbitrarily block you.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#208

Post by 0x457 »

capableweb wrote: post #93
jacquesm wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Never tie your Google account to any other Google product. Google pretty much forces you to do so.

Yeah, either you'd get your gmail account banned because of something happened in google ads, or they ban you for having multiple accounts and trying to "circumvent their anti-abuse policy" or something. The only way to win this game is to not play it.

Well, I'm banned from AdSense (when I was something like 15 y.o I used bots to farm clicks...), everything else in google ecosystem works fine, and they even send me gift cards for ad sense that I can't use.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#209

Post by mattdesl »

jonathanyc wrote: post #198
teux wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: this is not my domain. But wouldn’t the blockchain give a decentralised record of ownership that was protected from corruption? If a single entity owns this database, how does it fare against attacks/bad actors, or highly capitalists companies like EA going in and editing it in their best interests. You need a truly good organisation to host that single DB and I’m not sure I tryst any of them at the momen…

After the Ethereum DAO exploit, the result was two blockchains: Ethereum Classic and Ethereum. Was that better protection against database manipulation than the existing legal system provides?

Yes, it’s much more democratic than the status quo in traditional online payment and digital asset systems. Users forked and had the choice to follow the DAO-revert chain. Another hard fork happened recently: PoS. There is still a PoW chain, for the small minority that wants to use it.

Re: Tell HN: Doing a chargeback against Google will get your account banned

#210

Post by maria2 »

patmcc wrote: post #200
r3trohack3r wrote: post #107

Honestly, the top comment is more concerning: https://old.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/zndbku/tifu_by_accide... Account stolen. Obvious fraudulent charges. EA refuses to make it right. Customer rightfully disputes the charges. EA closes their account locking them out of an entire catalogue of content THEY HAD PAID for. This whole “you don’t really own digital content” ruse needs to be popped. A company shouldn’t be abl…

It's totally ridiculous. Imagine Walmart tried to do the same thing with physical goods; say any shoplifter Walmart catches immediately gets all their Walmart purchases taken back. We'd never allow it. Even if they were conflicted of theft, we wouldn't say "oh, sure, Walmart can come in and take your desk". Why have we allowed it with digital goods?

I don’t think that many people would complain if shoplifters were forced to return legitimately purchased wares. After all, we fine people for shoplifting. Money is fungible. So the effect is similar.
Post reply on HN