Live data from Hacker News

Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

abc.net.au

121–130 of 220 posts

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#121
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even to suggest that Google must respond to every complaint of content on third party websites just cannot possibly scale. Must everything scale?

The amount of human workers to process the requests definitively must scale with the requests. What may be desirable is cases where cost does not scale with revenue. But that should be no guarantee for long-term gains, because it provides room for competition that could make a cheaper offer at the same internal cost.

Gonna be real with you, I have no idea what you mean. My point in asking was that scaling Google to infinity might in fact not be a good thing.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#122
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so much "be careful with your UI" as "when you're actually notified that your UI is treading on somebody, you better stop (treading on that particular person)".

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

The fascinating thing here imho is that until recently it was pretty expensive to communicate with customers at that scale. You would have to staff some XXL call centers and find some way to process the communications in the context of the technologies used.

We've seen the many useless chat bots attempt to remedy the puzzle but the situation is rather different with LLM's

I for example reported on yt that the subtitle font-size is to small to read. I didn't bother to investigate what drives the inconsistency but the font is much smaller than everything else on the page.

If humans have to read this, write a report, put it in a bug tracker etc it will never be important enough to do something about it.

An LLM could figure out which line of code determines the font size. It could establish if it is indeed smaller than the other fonts and when. Then it could combine many similar reports into a simple easy to read list of tweaks with code examples.

I hardly ever use subs and normally I sit closer to the screen I didn't bother to search for the issue on google. Writing this I find an article on a 3rd party website that explains there are settings for the subtitles. There is a warning on this menu that says the settings are not persistent and will only work for this video but after changing the font size it works for all videos.

Should I report that as well? If nothing will be done with it why bother?

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#123

As other commenters have noted this is a classic pyrrhic victory. If nothing else I have to respect her because I cannot imagine the tenacity it took to pursue this. I can't speak to the merits or substance of the case but I know I don't have it. It's clear from the article she's a fighter with her initial reaction to discovering this: "She contemplated taking her life, saying it destroyed her career in research." To…

The woman made up shit about some psychics (after finding out the hard way that there is no such thing as a psychic) and then got mad again when she was served some of that same medicine. Sounds more like someone that wanted to avoid the consequences of her own choices rather than a courageous fighter standing up to the big evil corporation.

I wasn't commenting on any of these points, I specifically said "I can't speak to the merits or substance of the case". I certainly didn't say anything about going up against an "evil corporation".

I'm trying to reference the humanity aspects of the situation, which I've found time and time again seems to be completely lost on HN (see: downvotes). It's called empathy.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#124
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

Chrome has had a bug for ~6 months where for certain TLDs, it searches instead of going to the typed url. It happens for .no. Google isn't incentivized to fix it, since they now most likely get a visitor on their search page and earn some money. Combined with a different issue, this is fairly dangerous: Google allows fake scam websites to pay to get the top ad. Above the URL you ended up searching for. There are case…

That, and also the plethora of search suggestions like 192.168.O.1 (notice anything wrong?) happily presented up there. No, DDG doesn't show them, so yes IT IS possible.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#125
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so much "be careful with your UI" as "when you're actually notified that your UI is treading on somebody, you better stop (treading on that particular person)".

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

That's just it. This one time, Google got slapped for this kind of behavior.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#126
post #88
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

That's just a lazy meme take, there's obviously a documented process to request removal of content from their products, including Search. https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?sjid...

The request process is indeed easy enough. Now, if you also expect it having results, guess what.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, Duffy was ripped off by Kasamba. Can you really be ripped off by psychics? It's not like you can sue a church because your prayers haven't been answered, so I'm not sure of religion or spiritualism can be a "rip-off". If someone tells you they'll talk to your dead ancestors for money and you don't believe them, who's to say who's speaking the truth? The best you can do is use reasoning like "there's no scient…

> Can you really be ripped off by psychics? It's not like you can sue a church because your prayers haven't been answered, so I'm not sure of religion or spiritualism can be a "rip-off". Well, I would suggest that both are a "rip off" in the sense that they offer claims without evidence. But a distinction that I see between religious services and psychics is that religious services are not offering financial transact…

> But the fact remains that a lot of people still believe.

But also, a lot of people still believe in professional wrestling. Are pro wrestlers ripping people off?

Were pro wrestlers ripping people off worse in the '80s and earlier, when they tried really hard to maintain kayfabe, including denying the existence of kayfabe?

If you pay money to psychics and they tell you the sorts of things you paid them to tell you, is it really different from pro wrestlers or stage magicians? Or should that be "psychics", "wrestlers" or "magicians"?

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#128
post #107
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I'm Google I'd just stop indexing this site after the ruling and also talk to my competitors and suggest they do the same because it's bad for them. Seems like they index it but downweight already. That’s what they refused to do after losing the previous case on appeal. That means they no longer have any way to claim they didn’t know about it, since they spent large sums of money fighting it in court.

I get that and I'd accept the ruling (going to the highest possible court because this is kind of important for them). I'd just use it as a good opportunity to de-index a troubling site without any of the potential legal issues that could come with that (unfairly discriminating against said site or whatever).

I think the underlying issue is that Google strenuously avoids taking responsibility for their services. This kind of thing could be handled quickly by a modest customer service group but they don’t want to set the precedent that they do that sort of thing short of a lawsuit.

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#129
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

Chrome has had a bug for ~6 months where for certain TLDs, it searches instead of going to the typed url. It happens for .no. Google isn't incentivized to fix it, since they now most likely get a visitor on their search page and earn some money. Combined with a different issue, this is fairly dangerous: Google allows fake scam websites to pay to get the top ad. Above the URL you ended up searching for. There are case…

[deleted]

Re: Woman wins 12-year legal battle against Google

#130
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how can you notify Google of anything? Even when you report an important bug, bots and "product experts" just shrug it off. The only "notification" for Google is a lawsuit it seems.

Chrome has had a bug for ~6 months where for certain TLDs, it searches instead of going to the typed url. It happens for .no. Google isn't incentivized to fix it, since they now most likely get a visitor on their search page and earn some money. Combined with a different issue, this is fairly dangerous: Google allows fake scam websites to pay to get the top ad. Above the URL you ended up searching for. There are case…

Chrome has a public bug tracker.

I can't find any bug report for your issue.

Please post a link to your bug report, otherwise it seems like you didn't even try.

Post reply on HN