Earlier quoted context omitted.
A product manager with an MBA will argue this affects only a handful of customers, mostly non-paying, so fixing it should sit at the end of the backlog.
Is that wrong? How many outraged people here are going to stop using paid-for Google products because of this? (people who didn't stop using paid-for Google products for all the times this kind of thing happened before). It's approximately none, isn't it?
Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
371–380 of 464 posts
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#372I'm curious if it was related to the file name. I created a few 1-byte files with just "1" in them, with different names, including "output04.txt". No problems so far. Also uploaded variations with "\n" and "\r\n" after the "1". And enabled sharing to anyone with the link. No issues so far. Google drive does support metadata like a description and comments. I wonder if someone posted some copyrighted text in a commen…
My bet is someone did a DMCA claim on a file containing 1, either by mistake or as a joke. Then Automated Stupidity took over.
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#373Sorry about the issue, folks! The Google Drive team is aware of it and is working on remediating it.
And thank you all for the many test cases! :)
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
"In order to review, please reach the top of HN"
You do not have sufficient social credit to request a review, please become a better person and try again.
It's much faster and more effective to achieve high visibility by being a bad person, if you haven't noticed.
We get what we incentivize.
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's ridiculous. Storing social security numbers is necessary for lots of businesses. Imagine your filing cabinet not letting you file employment forms with a SS# on them. It's the sticky note password problem all over again...
This isn't some default thing on G-Suite; its the DLP setting which enterprises can elect to toggle on, if they pay for the most expensive G-Suite plan. It also, afaik, only applies to shared files. It does not work, in such a myriad of ways that I'd be blown away if it wasn't just some summer intern's project three years ago and it hasn't been touched since. But it does check boxes for audits. And enterprises don't…
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think dread is a bit over dramatic. I still find utility in Google Maps and GMail. Some products in the Google domain are heading that way but I don't dread Google I treat them as a business with respect to my coupling to them on a case by case basis. I used to be a Google first, now I am one to look at all options and decide if its worth coupling something else in my life to Google. In many cases its not worth it…
> I still find utility in Google Maps and GMail. Concerning the maps, try https://openstreetmap.org Concerning the GMail, see this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30051054
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
> printing presses, The arrival of mechanical movable type printing in Europe in the Renaissance introduced the era of mass communication, which permanently altered the structure of society. - Wiki > photocopiers A primary obstacle associated with the pre-xerographic copying technologies was the high cost of supplies: a Verifax print required supplies costing US$0.15 in 1969, while a Xerox print could be made for $0.…
How are modern day conditions not unique? The printing press changed the world but it was huge expensive hardware and if you had one it meant you were a major industry player and therefore an easy target for copyright enforcement. Copiers were also expensive machines owned by businesses and they also worked with physical paper. There were inherent limits to the scale of any copying operation. None of this is comparab…
I do suspect you are thinking about the industrial revolution, which came centuries later. Like 1760+
The Gutenberg press was something that relatively poor could produce, over time, in pieces with basic carpentry and blacksmithing (if you had the money), in the mid 1400s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLctAw4JZXE
You could make it even cheaper with purely wooden components (no double sided, sorry), which would require routine repair and was generally inefficient. Paper had been around since before the Egyptians but started becoming commonly understood and circulated in Germany around this time. It was difficult to obtain and make. Interestingly enough, you could use cloth/leather or another material instead. Gutenberg was relatively well funded once he started kicking out Bibles so he didn't think about these things, as he really just wanted nice Bibles produced. Innovative stop-gaps were part of how it's notoriety spread so rapidly. That left the traditional oil-based ink which could reasonably be made of anything (oil, sap, soot, filth, etc) with effort and a suitable substrate.
Printing was manual before, which was slow and expensive. Within a century of "the press", the ability to read was nearly ubiquitous. This jump-started the Enlightenment period.
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
A product manager with an MBA will argue this affects only a handful of customers, mostly non-paying, so fixing it should sit at the end of the backlog.
Is that wrong? How many outraged people here are going to stop using paid-for Google products because of this? (people who didn't stop using paid-for Google products for all the times this kind of thing happened before). It's approximately none, isn't it?
No, resources are scarce and should be allocated wherever offers the best returns.
But it's still lame that Google has this kind of bug, don't you think?
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
A product manager with an MBA will argue this affects only a handful of customers, mostly non-paying, so fixing it should sit at the end of the backlog.
Is that wrong? How many outraged people here are going to stop using paid-for Google products because of this? (people who didn't stop using paid-for Google products for all the times this kind of thing happened before). It's approximately none, isn't it?
A one off bug like this isn't the end of the world, but it fits into the larger pattern of how Google operates.
Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
FYI while Drive and YouTube's Content ID systems operate based on copyright, they are not entirely bound to it since they only actually have to comply with DMCA requests (barring any lawsuits that claim Google has the resources to create automated copyright detection systems[0]). Even when claiming copyright, they can remove and block access to content for any reason they want legally. 0: https://www.nytimes.com/2014…
They theoretically are based on copyright, but in practice the way it works is a few trusted entities are allowed to submit content and claim it as their own. If you have access to a Content Owner dashboard, you can claim literally any content you want from there- you'll just be putting your access to that dashboard at risk if you claim content that isn't actually yours to claim and Google gets wind of it. This is ho…