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

Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

loopinsight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#171

Post by vlozko »

davemel37 wrote: post #155
ceor4 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why Does Apple NEED an acknowledgment that they didn't do anything wrong? What difference would it make? I get what you're saying, but if Apples gets hammered with bad publicity every time their anti-fraud team does the right thing, they're going to stop doing the right thing. Especially as this case is going to be cited for years to come, it's important apple has something to point to and say: "We didn't just arbi…

>"We didn't just arbitrarily ban the account, it was involved in manipulating our reviews" >anti-fraud team does the right thing That's not what happened though. What happened is that Apple has their internal tools to link fraudulent accounts, to keep out bad actors, and this "good" account got caught in that web. You can just as easily argue that he didn't actually do anything wrong. After all, if he did Apple would…

But what if the developer did do something wrong and the account is not so "good" as the developer is trying to make it out to be. There's too much that stinks about it:

1. Opened up a developer account for a relative 4 years ago. Relative. Yeah, ok. And 4 years ago... don't credit cards usually expire before then?

2. The same devices were being used on both accounts. While the info isn't available, I'm sure Apple can know if these same devices were still in active use by both accounts.

3. Dash isn't the problem. Too many people seem fixated on the notion of why the developer needed to do review manipulation on Dash when that's not at all the problem. It's the other apps on the other account that were the subject of App Store review manipulation. These apps contained descriptions that contained the developer's own email address in it: http://appshopper.com/search/?searchdev=603546869&sort=name&...

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#172

Post by carterehsmith »

abalone wrote: post #120
Mithaldu wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here's Kapeli's explanation of what happened: https://blog.kapeli.com/dash-and-apple-my-side-of-the-story !!! it includes a recording of a phone call with Apple !!! Edit: After listening to the first 2 minutes of the call, i can say with absolute confidence that Apple is straight-up blackmailing him. I would love to hear opinions on whether this is something that could be taken to court. Here's the HN submission…

It sure sounds like Schiller's team screwed up here and should reinstate his account forthwith. In short, Kapeli helped a relative open an account years ago but has otherwise been unassociated with that account. He technically shouldn't have used his credit card to help his relative, but this is Romania and it's just a nominal $99 fee, so he probably didn't think much of it. Apple's stance is they now look at them as…

> "In short, Kapeli helped a relative open an account years ago but has otherwise been unassociated with that account."

That's what Kapeli claims. How exactly do you know that the above is true? As opposed to, you know, himself creating two accounts.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#173

Post by carterehsmith »

vlozko wrote: post #171
davemel37 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"We didn't just arbitrarily ban the account, it was involved in manipulating our reviews" >anti-fraud team does the right thing That's not what happened though. What happened is that Apple has their internal tools to link fraudulent accounts, to keep out bad actors, and this "good" account got caught in that web. You can just as easily argue that he didn't actually do anything wrong. After all, if he did Apple would…

But what if the developer did do something wrong and the account is not so "good" as the developer is trying to make it out to be. There's too much that stinks about it: 1. Opened up a developer account for a relative 4 years ago. Relative. Yeah, ok. And 4 years ago... don't credit cards usually expire before then? 2. The same devices were being used on both accounts. While the info isn't available, I'm sure Apple ca…

Interesting... and this is com.kapeli - seems to be related:

https://software.com/publisher/kapeli

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#174

Post by abalone »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #167
abalone wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a bad analogy. This is case of mistaken identity, not a bad referral. Ask yourself, why are not giving this respected developer the benefit of the doubt? A better analogy would be: You loaned your underage friend your ID 4 years ago and forgot about it. They proceeded to behave badly at a bar over a period of years without your knowledge. Then the bar owner confuses your identity based solely on that ID, desp…

This is also a bad analogy. The other account who is supposedly outside of the control of Kapeli, is involved in thousands of fraudulent ratings manipulations of Kapeli's apps. How likely is it that if the account were so totally out of Kapeli that this cousin would waste their time doing this? It's highly unlikely.

Not Kapeli's apps. There is no indication that there were fraudulent reviews of Dash, nor would it even make sense for there to be since it's so popular. Kapeli's own account was only used for Dash.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#175

Post by abalone »

carterehsmith wrote: post #172
abalone wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sure sounds like Schiller's team screwed up here and should reinstate his account forthwith. In short, Kapeli helped a relative open an account years ago but has otherwise been unassociated with that account. He technically shouldn't have used his credit card to help his relative, but this is Romania and it's just a nominal $99 fee, so he probably didn't think much of it. Apple's stance is they now look at them as…

> "In short, Kapeli helped a relative open an account years ago but has otherwise been unassociated with that account." That's what Kapeli claims. How exactly do you know that the above is true? As opposed to, you know, himself creating two accounts.

Logic. Apple called him and conceded that the reason they thought they were the same "entity" is simply because both used the same credit card number. If Kapeli wanted to be deceptive and create another account to commit a bunch of fraud on that appeared unassociated with him, he'd use another credit card, bundle ID, etc.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#176

Post by ixtli »

MBCook wrote: post #128
ixtli wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a personal attack? It simply acknowledges that both of these websites are written by individuals. Would the substance of the comment be different had he simply used the website's names?

Calling someone a shill is a personal attack.

What is the appropriate phrasing, then? "This website is a surrogate for apple that posts their press releases without analysis?" I just don't see what the practical difference is: we're all adults, we know the point that's trying to be made.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#177

Post by davemel37 »

vlozko wrote: post #171
davemel37 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"We didn't just arbitrarily ban the account, it was involved in manipulating our reviews" >anti-fraud team does the right thing That's not what happened though. What happened is that Apple has their internal tools to link fraudulent accounts, to keep out bad actors, and this "good" account got caught in that web. You can just as easily argue that he didn't actually do anything wrong. After all, if he did Apple would…

But what if the developer did do something wrong and the account is not so "good" as the developer is trying to make it out to be. There's too much that stinks about it: 1. Opened up a developer account for a relative 4 years ago. Relative. Yeah, ok. And 4 years ago... don't credit cards usually expire before then? 2. The same devices were being used on both accounts. While the info isn't available, I'm sure Apple ca…

I do agree that he could totally be lying...but that doesn't seem to be Apples belief or they wouldn't reinstate him.

Also, if he really was guilty, why would he poke the bear after apple agreed to reinstate him...why not apologize and get off scott free.

It appears to me like both sides agreed to a set of facts and now its just a matter of setting the record straight. No one seems to want to admit fault and they are being childish about that since its in both of their interests to do so.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#178

Post by dpark »

abalone wrote: post #175
carterehsmith wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "In short, Kapeli helped a relative open an account years ago but has otherwise been unassociated with that account." That's what Kapeli claims. How exactly do you know that the above is true? As opposed to, you know, himself creating two accounts.

Logic. Apple called him and conceded that the reason they thought they were the same "entity" is simply because both used the same credit card number. If Kapeli wanted to be deceptive and create another account to commit a bunch of fraud on that appeared unassociated with him, he'd use another credit card, bundle ID, etc.

Of course, because no one committing fraud ever makes mistakes.

I have no idea if Popescu was really involved in the fraudulent activity or not. But dismissing it as too dumb to be possible is no better than dismissing the possibility of Apple making a detection mistake as too dumb to be possible.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#179

Post by trymas »

davemel37 wrote: post #155
ceor4 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why Does Apple NEED an acknowledgment that they didn't do anything wrong? What difference would it make? I get what you're saying, but if Apples gets hammered with bad publicity every time their anti-fraud team does the right thing, they're going to stop doing the right thing. Especially as this case is going to be cited for years to come, it's important apple has something to point to and say: "We didn't just arbi…

>"We didn't just arbitrarily ban the account, it was involved in manipulating our reviews" >anti-fraud team does the right thing That's not what happened though. What happened is that Apple has their internal tools to link fraudulent accounts, to keep out bad actors, and this "good" account got caught in that web. You can just as easily argue that he didn't actually do anything wrong. After all, if he did Apple would…

> That's not what happened though. What happened is that Apple has their internal tools to link fraudulent accounts, to keep out bad actors, and this "good" account got caught in that web.

Imagine a family account at the bank. Husband is committing fraud, bank closes the account to stop fraud and 'good' wife cannot use her credit card anymore.

EDIT: afaik, other account also used the same identifier for their apps. Apple sees that there is a person/company who has fraudulent activity in one of it's accounts and bans that person/company. Simple as that.

Re: Apple Responds to Dash Controversy

#180

Post by abalone »

dpark wrote: post #178
abalone wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Logic. Apple called him and conceded that the reason they thought they were the same "entity" is simply because both used the same credit card number. If Kapeli wanted to be deceptive and create another account to commit a bunch of fraud on that appeared unassociated with him, he'd use another credit card, bundle ID, etc.

Of course, because no one committing fraud ever makes mistakes. I have no idea if Popescu was really involved in the fraudulent activity or not. But dismissing it as too dumb to be possible is no better than dismissing the possibility of Apple making a detection mistake as too dumb to be possible.

I didn't say it was dumb to think it "possible" for him to be the culprit. I said it was dumb to shut down a top developer account without warning.
Post reply on HN