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

Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

blog.pushbullet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 811 posts

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#271

Post by codegladiator »

andrewmutz wrote: post #112
danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

Extension developers monetizing their extensions by selling the data that they get from users is a big problem. It's the reason that I don't freely install useful extensions that I find today. I have no way to distinguish those who sell my data from those who dont. I love that Google is starting to solve this problem, and from my perspective an extension that is sending and receiving SMS messages should not be reques…

> I love that Google is starting to solve this problem

They aren't solving the problem. They are making sure only they can get all the user information.

I would rather give all my information to everyone rather than giving all my information to google.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#272

Post by nucleardog »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #153
minikites wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Fastmail for more than a decade and I don't know why someone would trust something as important as email to a company like Google.

Because when it first was released, they were one of (if not the only) (free) email providers to give every user over a gigabyte of storage. At the time, most email providers only allowed mailboxes in the dozens of megabytes range. Nowadays, everywhere gives you plenty of space, but for me personally, it’s just been the fact that I’ve been using it for so long and switching is a hassle. I’m sure it’s the same for a l…

Dozens of megabytes?

Pretty sure Hotmail (which at the time was like 20% of all web traffic) was still offering a whopping 2MB of space when Gmail launched. It was only after Gmail came out that they started bumping the quota from where it had been since the mid-90s.

Gmail was a HUGE deal. People were going nuts over the invites.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#273

Post by streb-lo »

freehunter wrote: post #233
ashtonkem wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-cheat through obscurity on the other hand is absolutely a thing. As a metaphor, there’s a damn good reason you can’t just pay an Olympic anti-doping facility to test your urine; it would be trivial to develop protocols that evade the tests if you could do that.

If anti-cheat through obscurity worked, there would be no cheaters. The fact that cheaters exist means it does not work.

Your logic does not follow.

There are certainly less cheaters than if there were no anti-cheat methods. To use OP's example, an open source urine testing procedure would be trivial to game. The same thing goes for open-source multiplayer games.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#274

Post by fgonzag »

danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

That's what you got out of it? Google doing a good job? They sent an email with no guidance whatsoever.

These guys went above and beyond what most developers would've done, which would have been to contact support until they get a clear answer.

This only alienates the extension ecosystem. And this was the primary reason I switched to Firefox. Google is the new Microsoft. If I remember correctly, they started Chrome exactly so this very thing wouldn't happen.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#275

Post by 29athrowaway »

wlesieutre wrote: post #36
Baeocystin wrote: post #11

Another long-term PushBullet customer here. Anyone at Google who is listening- this kind of behavior kills my desire to continue using your products dead. I need functionality, of the type PushBullet has provided for years, to do my work. The recent nerfing of ublock origin has already had me feeling iffy on things. Behavior like this is simply unacceptable. If you want people to use your services, you need to have s…

Chrome is a trivially easy product to switch off of compared to other Google properties like Gmail and YouTube. Have you tried Firefox recently?

I have a firewall appliance at home.

One day I noticed that some of the stuff I blacklisted (mostly ads) started showing up again.

Why? Firefox's new DNS over HTTPS was bypassing all my firewall DNS rules.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#276

Post by mintplant »

fwn wrote: post #250
mintplant wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is temporary while the Android team builds out and stabilizes the add-on APIs supported in the new Firefox for Android. Otherwise it'd be a total crapshoot whether an add-on you tried to install worked or broke randomly (potentially in gnarly ways).

If locking down on the extension ecosystem were only temporary they could just defer the nearing downgrade of their main line browser until their replacement is fully functional. But that's not what they do. Instead we do have a clear announcement on a feature removal and a vague hint that they might add it again in the future. It's absolutely not sure that disabling non-store extensions is only a temporary defect. I…

> If locking down on the extension ecosystem were only temporary they could just defer the nearing downgrade of their main line browser until their replacement is fully functional.

The update is going ahead because the new Firefox for Android is such a dramatic improvement along all other axes, and because, from a development perspective, the incarnation it's replacing is saddled with legacy and technical debt. It never received most of the benefits from Quantum, for example.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#277

Post by ztjio »

toohotatopic wrote: post #210
cpascal wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One worry about tying your identity to your own domain, is the security of your identity (aka your domain) hinges on the security of your registrar. If a bad actor can socially engineer their way into controlling your domain, your entire identity is compromised. Here's a blog post about this nightmare happening to someone: https://medium.com/@N/how-i-lost-my-50-000-twitter-username-...

So, which ones are the good registrars?

Google is great for this because they will never actually let anyone talk to a human in order to apply social engineering techniques ;)

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#278

Post by hutzlibu »

victorvation wrote: post #81
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #62

I am the proud recipient of many Apple rejection notices from the App Store (I have been releasing iOS apps since 2012). I have not had an app pulled, but I have had many rejections to submitted apps (the latest were received yesterday). In all of the notices, Apple is usually quite explicit in what the problem is, including attaching screengrabs, and they will respond, if I ask them for further clarification.

I've seen cases where Apple will actually decompile/debug your app and point you the exact feature / method / line that they find unacceptable. Despite all of my other complaints about iOS ecosystem, they _do_ keep their App Store walled garden fairly well tended.

Out of curiosity, where those big name apps, or small ones? I assume that level of service is reserved or more important apps?

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#279

Post by crankylinuxuser »

the_gipsy wrote: post #222
adverbly wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved. You're missing the point here. The developer isn't given any guidance on what needs tightening. This shouldn't be guess and check. These rules impact this developer's livelihood. They should be well defined, documented, and communicated.

> These rules impact this developer's livelihood. Let this be the millionth lesson of "the perils of building on a platform instead of on a protocol".

You misspelled "sharecropper".

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#280

Post by arseniclifeform »

sudoit wrote: post #226
foobarbazetc wrote: post #131

lol. We have the same problem, but on the Google Play Store. We have an brand name app used by millions of people. We uploaded an update where the only change was a new Firebase library. Google rejected the update for vague reasons (“violation of Google Play policies” but not telling us which one). Appealing the rejection, the CSR just pasted the vague policy thing back at us. We asked for more information and they j…

Had the same problem when I made a fairly successful app in university. Whole account got deleted for a “3rd strike” meaning “3rd resubmission.” I’ve made a new account and their AI black box still doesn’t realize it’s me...

By whole account deleted do you mean your Chrome dev "account" or your Google account including Gmail, Gcal, and YouTube? The latter is my greatest fear.
Post reply on HN