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

The only way to get hold of a human at Google

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 189 posts

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#141

Post by slurgfest »

joezydeco wrote: post #54
dkulchenko wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switching to a custom domain is a good idea even if you don't pay for Google Apps. Because if Google kicks you off for whatever reason, you just change your MX record and your email is fine.

YES. I see all these comments above saying "man I'm afraid of being totally dependent on gmail". Owning your own MX record is the way out of that situation.

Yes, it is absolutely prudent and a good way to handle things.

It is also not something which most people have heard they should do. It also requires you to be something of a power user to even understand. Many people are so far into this mistake that it would take time and even more technical expertise to dig out.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#142

Post by bobbydavid »

antihero wrote: post #75
bobbydavid wrote: post #46

The vitriol regarding Google's services is unjustified. Gmail is a free service. Google allows you to use it for free, in exchange for being shown ads. You have access to the same infrastructure that paying clients use, and the same uptime, but without paying. You can download all of your data easily, and at any time. Nothing about that is predatory on the free users. What would you say is the appropriate market "pri…

Nope. Completely untrue. They benefit from us using their services. We are doing them a favour by choosing them over others - their business is built upon people using their services. If everyone just their our money back (£0) and stopped using Google's services, they wouldn't have a business any more. By using a service such as Gmail, we've trusted them and invested our on-line lives in them in order that they can m…

Google definitely benefits from free Gmail users, but that wouldn't be true if every free user got human attention when things went wrong, regardless of who was at fault.

I guess I see OP's problem stemming from the existence of bugs/quirks/spam attacks. As a developer, I know these things are simply impossible to prevent with 100% certainty. I don't feel that Google is morally culpable for bugs or spammers, unless they are somehow adding bugs to the point of negligence.

In fact, as a developer, the idea of being morally culpable for bugs scares me, since that kind of implies I am doomed to be immoral.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#143

Post by [deleted] »

patio11 wrote: post #26
cletus wrote: post #15

I'm sorry for the trouble you're having. I have on idea of what's happened and why but thought it timely to point out for the benefit of those reading this thread: I highly suggest you use two-factor authentication with GMail: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/advanced-sign-in-secu... Or Jeff Atwood's post on this: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/04/make-your-email-hac... Your email is too valuable to be l…

cough If any Googlers are reading this, Google often phrases error messages more like that quote ("Us us us us us us, ergo, you don't get what you need") instead of like cletus did ("You you you, you you you, ergo, we're going to take this action on your behalf".). Dale Carnegie, Cletus, and every sane copywriter on the planet strongly suggest rewriting that prompt and related ones. After taking baby steps like sound…

[deleted]

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#144

Post by bmelton »

slurgfest wrote: post #138
bmelton wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The amount of people they'd have to hire to support that 1% of their users could make the service untenable as free to the rest of us. In my opinion, the thing done wrong was offering support through unofficial channels. It sets the wrong expectations and perpetuates the notion that if you know the right people, you'll get the support that others can't, and honestly don't deserve. If I give rakes out to 1…

People depend heavily on these services. Google does not discourage them. I would love it if the front page of gmail.com read like: "EASY COME, EASY GO Gmail is a quick and dirty email service for people who don't really need reliable access. Please do not bother signing up unless it does not matter whether you lose the address and all your email." I think that would begin to resolve the problem being highlighted her…

Something like this? From their terms.

OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY SET OUT IN THESE TERMS OR ADDITIONAL TERMS, NEITHER GOOGLE NOR ITS SUPPLIERS OR DISTRIBUTORS MAKE ANY SPECIFIC PROMISES ABOUT THE SERVICES. FOR EXAMPLE, WE DON’T MAKE ANY COMMITMENTS ABOUT THE CONTENT WITHIN THE SERVICES, THE SPECIFIC FUNCTION OF THE SERVICES, OR THEIR RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, OR ABILITY TO MEET YOUR NEEDS. WE PROVIDE THE SERVICES “AS IS”.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#146

Post by pyre »

paulhauggis wrote: post #90
pyre wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed this recently with CraigsList too. They have a 'contact form' that just sends you an automated email suggesting that you read their FAQ page. Why bother to have a contact form then?

Amazon is a little better, but not by much. They send you an automated email, but sign it with a real name. I wonder if they just have a program on the other side that cycles through names.

Maybe they just have a Mechanical Turk that pays people pennies to just put a name into a box.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#147

Post by slurgfest »

bobbydavid wrote: post #46

The vitriol regarding Google's services is unjustified. Gmail is a free service. Google allows you to use it for free, in exchange for being shown ads. You have access to the same infrastructure that paying clients use, and the same uptime, but without paying. You can download all of your data easily, and at any time. Nothing about that is predatory on the free users. What would you say is the appropriate market "pri…

I shouldn't need emergency technical help. If they want to provide a reliable service which I can use to convince them that I should be allowed to access my own data, that would be really swell and should not require full blown tech support nonsense.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#148

Post by slurgfest »

bmelton wrote: post #137
slurgfest wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail is not a used rake. [Dick comes to the door of Tom.] Dick: Hey Tom, I see that you don't have a mailbox. I have a few hundred extras down the street, would you like to use one on the condition that I might analyze who is sending you mail and the like? It's really secure and it's all the rage in the city you can store 2000 pounds of mail forever blah blah blah. You should really use it! Tom: Sure Dick, it's a re…

Well, you have to win points (and got one from me) for coming up with the best analogy. Though as I recently discovered, they do have phone support, and message boards, and google groups, and all that jazz. I understand that I'm perhaps the outlier in thinking this, but Google is acting exactly as they said they would, and exactly as they always have. I don't see malice in that, and I certainly don't see 'evil'.

I agree with you that Google is not evil. All I am saying is that Google is a Dick.

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#149

Post by [deleted] »

bmelton wrote: post #137
slurgfest wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail is not a used rake. [Dick comes to the door of Tom.] Dick: Hey Tom, I see that you don't have a mailbox. I have a few hundred extras down the street, would you like to use one on the condition that I might analyze who is sending you mail and the like? It's really secure and it's all the rage in the city you can store 2000 pounds of mail forever blah blah blah. You should really use it! Tom: Sure Dick, it's a re…

Well, you have to win points (and got one from me) for coming up with the best analogy. Though as I recently discovered, they do have phone support, and message boards, and google groups, and all that jazz. I understand that I'm perhaps the outlier in thinking this, but Google is acting exactly as they said they would, and exactly as they always have. I don't see malice in that, and I certainly don't see 'evil'.

[deleted]

Re: The only way to get hold of a human at Google

#150

Post by slurgfest »

bmelton wrote: post #144
slurgfest wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People depend heavily on these services. Google does not discourage them. I would love it if the front page of gmail.com read like: "EASY COME, EASY GO Gmail is a quick and dirty email service for people who don't really need reliable access. Please do not bother signing up unless it does not matter whether you lose the address and all your email." I think that would begin to resolve the problem being highlighted her…

Something like this? From their terms. OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY SET OUT IN THESE TERMS OR ADDITIONAL TERMS, NEITHER GOOGLE NOR ITS SUPPLIERS OR DISTRIBUTORS MAKE ANY SPECIFIC PROMISES ABOUT THE SERVICES. FOR EXAMPLE, WE DON’T MAKE ANY COMMITMENTS ABOUT THE CONTENT WITHIN THE SERVICES, THE SPECIFIC FUNCTION OF THE SERVICES, OR THEIR RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, OR ABILITY TO MEET YOUR NEEDS. WE PROVIDE THE SERVICES “AS I…

Of course this is standard CYA legal boilerplate and from the perspective of most users, it might as well be posted behind the refrigerator.

If they put that right on the front page in big letters, replacing the current brags about how awesome it is and how it makes your life easier, then that would filter out most of the users who are clueless enough to get in serious trouble this way.

Like big nasty warning messages on cigarettes.

Of course that's not helpful to Google, but if Google can't be expected to look out for public interests at all then it isn't anyone else's business to look out for Google's either.

Post reply on HN