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

Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

branded3.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 430 posts

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#231

Post by nicholassmith »

I wonder if Path will end up being used as a model of what not to do for start-ups, there's been that many missteps that it's hard to separate the network from the issues.

Overreaching use of customer data, check ("But everyone else was doing it!"), and then saying "it turned out the customers didn't understand this", spamming contacts, a CEO who come across as somewhat of an arse at multiple opportunities.

If I was a VC I'd be so nervy about investing money in a business that's repeatedly getting caught out doing some seriously shady business practises.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#233

Post by saraid216 »

tlogan wrote: post #118
crazygringo wrote: post #34

How about another detail -- the fact that the message said the user had photos to share, when he didn't? There's annoying spam, and then there's straight-out-lying spam -- the "x has sent you a message, you need to create an account to view it" type. Just curious, is there a way to sue/fine a company like this for false advertising, essentially?

This is proven (and risky) way to grow. I really cannot blame them: they have to pay their rent and VCs are nervous. This approach might burn them completely but also can get them to some significant number of users (after which they will issue an apology and pay all fines if needed).

Would it also be okay to murder people in order to pay your rent and your backers are nervous? What about just hitting them over the head? What about just threatening to hit them?

Ethical justification isn't easy, but it's also not this hard. The entire point of being ethical is that you might lose out as a result of being ethical. If you opt to discard ethics in order to get ahead, you are being unethical. That is what it means to be unethical.

This. Is. Unethical.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#235

Post by micampe »

crazygringo wrote: post #34

How about another detail -- the fact that the message said the user had photos to share, when he didn't? There's annoying spam, and then there's straight-out-lying spam -- the "x has sent you a message, you need to create an account to view it" type. Just curious, is there a way to sue/fine a company like this for false advertising, essentially?

How about another detail — the fact that – according do another comment here, the only one that seems to actually have looked at how the app behaves before jumping the gun – the app tells you it's going to invite everyone on first launch and you need to tell it not to?

Still bad, but quite a different perspective.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#236

Post by ProblemFactory »

georgemcbay wrote: post #159
ios84dev wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you actually prevent an app from using one or more of those permissions? Like can I give it permission to my camera but not to the call log?

There is no official support for this AFAIK. Some 3rd party ROMs like Cyanogenmod have this functionality built in, though, and if you root your phone there are apps like "Permissions Denied" that you can run to do this. I'd assume the reason Google is somewhat hesitant to offer this officially is that many apps don't deal well with this -- some do degrade gracefully, while others end up throwing task-ending exceptio…

There is a simple solution for managing permissions for poorly built apps: serve them empty or fake data.

Every app already has to consider the case of GPS being unavailable indoors, the contact list only having one person (yourself) in it, or the camera picture being black in darkness.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#237

Post by ern »

mjolk wrote: post #142
bitcartel wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to nip this in the bud. Maybe it's time to create a Hippocratic Oath for developers to publicly commit to? A future Path developer could then refuse to implement an unethical "feature" by pointing out that the company had hired them with the full knowledge that the oath had been undertaken. I don't think the company would pink slip the developer, as they would probably want to avoid any attention being drawn…

>Maybe it's time to create a Hippocratic Oath for developers to publicly commit to? This is silly. Stop trying to add grandeur to writing some code at X,Y startup/company. People don't die or get harmed when some social-messaging application spams someone. Code is a way to implement an idea. Most applications exist to make money. If this a shock to you, read the user agreement before installing/upgrading, uninstall t…

People don't die or get harmed when some social-messaging application spams someone.

I disagree. This case reminds me of Geni. You would put a relative's email address in to invite them, and they'd then receive a torrent of spammy "updates", until they registered to unsubscribe.

My less tech-savvy father added many relatives from his address book to Geni. Lots of hate from deranged relatives, and some less technically-inclined relatives are probably still being spammed, 6 years later-it made family gatherings awkward for a while. There are real-world, harmful consequences to this kind of scummy, unethical tactic.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#238

Post by IanChiles »

micampe wrote: post #225
jacquesm wrote: post #45

Path must really like thos FTC fines. Here's to hoping the next fine will exceed their cash reserves and we can put an end to this madness. The post is proof positive that path still uploads phonebooks from the app to their servers right after installing it.

> The post is proof positive that path still uploads phonebooks from the app to their servers right after installing it. Is it? The texts were coming from his phone number, which suggests they were sent from his phone (not necessarily, I know, but you said "proof positive"). I don't know how Android text message sending works, but there is likely some rate limiting to how many texts you can send so they certainly cou…

I've received no less than two text messages from Path today - both of which were not sent from my friends phones, but rather one of those 5 digit numbers that automated texts seem to use. This is... shady to say the least.

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#239

Post by TeMPOraL »

maxcan wrote: post #64

I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell and back, but still: http://jesuschristsiliconvalley.tumblr.com/post/46539276780/...

Looking at other posts, those writings lack empathy and imagination. The post about Google Glass [0] is probably one of the most asinine thing I read on the Internet this month.

[0] - http://jesuschristsiliconvalley.tumblr.com/post/48596551224/...

Re: Path texts my entire phonebook at 6 AM

#240

Post by __david__ »

ajg1977 wrote: post #88
Me1000 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is a great example of how people are so quick to rush to judgement with emotional reactions. Let's look at the facts: 1. Path was fined, not for anything involving address books, but for allowing 12 year olds to sign up for the service. 2. Yes... it is proof that Path uploads your phone book. Of course, they ask you. The OS won't even give you access to the phone book without prompting the user. So somew…

There's a big difference between "X would like to access your contacts" and "X would like to access your contacts, then store everything on their servers for reasons/duration of their determination"

But not from the OS's point of view. iOS (and Android) can only warn about the contact crossing the threshold into the app. After that the app can do as it pleases...
Post reply on HN