21–30 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> this is the lite version of what you are asking for I'd say this is the heavy version. A new startup can put together and run a GDPR compliant web app for over a year for far less than $15,000.
As long as no requests that you delete their data or provide them with a copy. As soon as that starts happening $15k doesn't go very far in man hours to comply.
Consistency of the process aside, I'm really not sure what people would expect.
(I work at Google, yadda yadda, but have nothing to do with this.)
Even for non-Gmail apps, this process is incredibly painful. I have an app that has been stuck in the process for weeks. Once you have read through the incredibly confusing and out of date documentation and submit what you think is the correct set of setting to comply with their policy, you then have to deal with the reviewer who will email you once every week if you are lucky. Usually to understand what they are ask…
We've gone through app review processes at other companies like Facebook, and it's all the same - plenty of time wasted with mostly ineptitude on the reviewer's side. Sometimes it feels like there's just one person working in Google/Facebook's basement doing these app reviews for minimum wage.
I understand the need to be thorough on these app reviews especially if the app touches sensitive user data, but when the reviewer doesn't even read the instructions provided to them properly, would you trust them to be thorough when it comes to ensuring the apps aren't malicious?
This all makes sense to me. If you're not providing enough value to users to cover the >$15k fee, you're just an attack vector for user data. Consistency of the process aside, I'm really not sure what people would expect. (I work at Google, yadda yadda, but have nothing to do with this.)
It would be a waste to use any services attached to it in my opinion. Otherwise oauth is a great technology, but interests may make it not worthwhile.
As both a gmail user and developer interested in applications to help me manage my personal information, this is incredibly depressing to hear. The idea of a verification process itself is great, and I applaud that effort. But some of these barriers seems put in place solely to kill competition and prevent startups from filling the personal data needs before Google comes up with its own plan. These exorbitant fees of…
It's the direction that everyone seems to be moving. Wall up the gardens, remove your own access to your information, and remove the ability to share and integrate across platforms. The weird thing is how quickly the sentiment turned from my perspective. I felt like one day most technical people applauded the ability to have total real-time access to your data, to be able to write code or use open source code to plug…
Facebook shared data on millions of users to Cambridge Analytica. I never gave my consent, you never did.
It is a different matter than having open APIs that allow you to get your own data out of Facebook.
I want to be able to get my own data on Facebook through open APIs. What I don't want is for Facebook to give away my data to other people without my consent. You can advocate for those 2 things at the same time.
A $15-75k fee is something that's hard to stomach at our stage. We have about 10 Gmail users excited to try our product and they might not have an issue accepting the "Unverified App" screen because we have earned some of their trust through phone calls and meetings. However, converting people that come across the app organically will be difficult.
We aren't sure when the right time will be to pay the fee and become verified. Anyone have ideas on strategy here? It could help us and other developers in the same position. We'd like to avoid raising money but this might be a good reason to - investors may see Google verification as a competitive advantage.
To the contrary it will be very good for innovation because it means people will build extensions for other email providers such as Fastmail.
Does Fastmail even provide an API like this?
And the optimized JMAP protocol too.
The fact that I am getting voted down proves how absolute the groupthink is... If you work in Google's ecosystem, however, the only possible exit is being bought by Google... Get bought by a competitor and they'll just turn you off.
As both a gmail user and developer interested in applications to help me manage my personal information, this is incredibly depressing to hear. The idea of a verification process itself is great, and I applaud that effort. But some of these barriers seems put in place solely to kill competition and prevent startups from filling the personal data needs before Google comes up with its own plan. These exorbitant fees of…
It's the direction that everyone seems to be moving. Wall up the gardens, remove your own access to your information, and remove the ability to share and integrate across platforms. The weird thing is how quickly the sentiment turned from my perspective. I felt like one day most technical people applauded the ability to have total real-time access to your data, to be able to write code or use open source code to plug…
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/payment-services-psd-2-directi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does Fastmail even provide an API like this?
Sure, IMAP, POP, CALDav, same as all the other mail providers... And the optimized JMAP protocol too. The fact that I am getting voted down proves how absolute the groupthink is... If you work in Google's ecosystem, however, the only possible exit is being bought by Google... Get bought by a competitor and they'll just turn you off.