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

Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

paulefou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 684 posts

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#551

Post by SllX »

wolverine876 wrote: post #545
SllX wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not a useful distinction. Market monopolies, if they exist, where they exist, are usually tied into those same government granted monopolies. Facebook the bare bones public domain Technology stack is a lot less valuable to investors than Facebook the service on the Facebook servers presented to Facebook account holders on Facebook’s private servers at Facebook.com paid for with Ad revenue generated by Facebook…

Facebook's extraordinary market power seems due to the network effect, not patents.

Not just patents: trademark too.

There’s only one Facebook. Without that, you also don’t have Facebook’s network effect tying it all together.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#552

Post by saurik »

knubie wrote: post #313
999900000999 wrote: post #106

By far the best part is they didn't automatically cancel his subscription. What a horrible company, if you've banned my account that's fine but cancel the subscription and refund my money. If y'all haven't looked at it yet, read up on the FCC's filing against Match. They knowingly prompt up tons of fake profiles, to get you engaged. Horrifically this has lead to romance scams being the number one source of fraud in t…

> By far the best part is they didn't automatically cancel his subscription. What a horrible company, if you've banned my account that's fine but cancel the subscription and refund my money. Could this have something to do with subscribing through the App Store? Maybe there is something in Apple's ToS, or some limitation in their billing API that prevents them from doing this.

Given that the App Store doesn't let developers give users refunds, it does sound likely to me that they can't cancel user subscriptions either.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#553

Post by ahtihn »

onion2k wrote: post #167
emacsen wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what happened in this situation, but generally refunding money for TOS violations is a bad idea. Let me explain why. Imagine that Alice runs a service where you can send people greeting cards. Bob decides he's going to use this service to cause trouble and instead of normal greeting cards, he sends people messages with hate speech, such as their race, their religion, says he hoped they get cancer, and so…

That's not how cancellations for subscriptions or refunds for services work though. If Bob has paid Alice to send cards, and she has sent them, then obviously no refund is necessary. Alice just needs to ban Bob from using the service again. In the case of Tinder banning someone, they should automatically cancel the subscription because the customer no longer have access to what they're paying for, and if there's a pa…

> Companies should not be allowed to issue 'punishment' to customers.

Why not? Contracts with penalties are very common.

Subscriptions should be cancelled when an account is banned but it's not obvious to me why there should be a refund. Subscription services usually don't allow for partial refunds when you cancel. If you force companies to refund in case of a ban, you need to force them to allow cancellation at any time with the same refund.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#554

Post by 1024core »

999900000999 wrote: post #106

By far the best part is they didn't automatically cancel his subscription. What a horrible company, if you've banned my account that's fine but cancel the subscription and refund my money. If y'all haven't looked at it yet, read up on the FCC's filing against Match. They knowingly prompt up tons of fake profiles, to get you engaged. Horrifically this has lead to romance scams being the number one source of fraud in t…

> When I actually meet someone, It was always someone who is in their mid-20s to 30s without a job.

I read this article (a long time ago) about a NYC girl who was saying that investing $30/mo on a Match.com account was the best investment she had made, as it meant she'd get treated to top restaurants, etc. by the guys for free.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#555

Post by JohnHaugeland »

guerrilla wrote: post #448
JohnHaugeland wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

only the ones with valid statistics count some guy dug up a bunch of studies done on abductions by satanists in the 1990s. remember that, from 60 minutes? the punchline was there had never actually been such an abduction, but there were 30+ studies. and that's replicated a lot. the quality of the replication matters.

Alright, keep that goal post moving then. In the meantime, I'll go with the best we got.

There's no goalpost moving. It's the same thing I said originally.

You shouldn't be swayed by inappropriately small sample sizes. Your response was "well what if I had a lot of them?" My answer was "still no."

.

> In the meantime, I'll go with the best we got.

This isn't even close to the best we've got.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#556

Post by smsm42 »

jquery wrote: post #307
smsm42 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you don't seem to realize here is that various app stores, etc almost never sell you any content. They sell you a temporary revokable right to access content. It's like a movie theater ticket, with an added bonus of ushers being paranoid assholes that could kick you out any moment without a reason. You don't own the movie, you can just watch it, if you're lucky. If you think that service isn't worth the price -…

Really? When I buy a steam game, the big green button says “purchase”, not “receive a temporarily revocable right to access”. It’s the digital age. My digital items are my possessions. This dichotomy in your head between the “real” and the “digital” doesn’t exist for the younger generation. There are few alternatives to these large tech companies. As I’ve gotten older I’ve wisened up and I buy DRM-free digital goods…

The big green button lies. They are trying to bend the language to mean things that it legally doesn't mean. Just as they call unauthorized distribution of content "piracy" or "theft" (it's neither), they call a temporary revokable permission to access their content "purchase". And if you click that button, you agree with it knowingly. When it bites you in the nether regions, they'll remind you that was exactly what you paid the money for. Nobody forced you to pay money for that, you did it voluntarily. You are the one that gave them all the money to build this system.

I understand that you may value digital goods. I have some I value too. You just need to understand that just as with physical goods, even more with digital ones - if you don't control it, you haven't bought it. If somebody could just come and take your car, any time for any reason, you haven't bought a car. If somebody can just come and take your game anytime for any reason - you haven't bought a game. You bought a ticket to play it, maybe, but that's wholly other business.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#557

Post by 999900000999 »

1024core wrote: post #554
999900000999 wrote: post #106

By far the best part is they didn't automatically cancel his subscription. What a horrible company, if you've banned my account that's fine but cancel the subscription and refund my money. If y'all haven't looked at it yet, read up on the FCC's filing against Match. They knowingly prompt up tons of fake profiles, to get you engaged. Horrifically this has lead to romance scams being the number one source of fraud in t…

> When I actually meet someone, It was always someone who is in their mid-20s to 30s without a job. I read this article (a long time ago) about a NYC girl who was saying that investing $30/mo on a Match.com account was the best investment she had made, as it meant she'd get treated to top restaurants, etc. by the guys for free.

To be fair, men do it too!

https://la.eater.com/2019/1/17/18186932/dine-dash-dater-arre...

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#558

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway14356 wrote: post #544
ska wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nd can definitively say it's the best decision a person can make for their mental well being. No, you can only definitively say it's was the best decision you made for your mental well being. With the plausible suggestion that it might be good for some others, also.

for what it is worth it was great being the last person around without a smart phone. I dont know how old you are but people use to be alone with their own thoughts. Amazing things happen if you ponder situations until satisfied with your own conclusions. the delay made for wonderful long form conversations. exchanging text like we are doing here doesnt build relationships either. if i would die in the next 20 min yo…

[deleted]

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#559

Post by mschuster91 »

teh_klev wrote: post #168
mschuster91 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have to worry about banks banning you Banks ban you for joke comments in bank transfers or anything that alludes to drugs, sex work or gambling. Or for transferring remittances to your parents in a way some algorithm deemed to be "structuring" or "money laundering for terrorists". PayPal bans you for whatever the fuck their AI decided on a whim. I've been on HN for over eight and a half years now and help re…

> Banks ban you for joke comments in bank transfers or anything that alludes to drugs, sex work or gambling Surely it must be possible to exercise a wee bit of self control and not be an edgelord in every aspect of one's life?

Banks should not be allowed to automatically ban people without a human in the loop ffs.

Re: Tinder just permabanned me or the problem with big tech

#560

Post by guerrilla »

JohnHaugeland wrote: post #555
guerrilla wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, keep that goal post moving then. In the meantime, I'll go with the best we got.

There's no goalpost moving. It's the same thing I said originally. You shouldn't be swayed by inappropriately small sample sizes. Your response was "well what if I had a lot of them?" My answer was "still no." . > In the meantime, I'll go with the best we got. This isn't even close to the best we've got.

My original claim is that something like that was true and what someone else was referring to and I gave you a lazy link, and you complained about the guys terrible methodology and replication. I told you that there are dozens of studies and data analyses (some are on huge data sets [1]) out there and your response is that oh no they have to be quality. That's a goalpost move from "this is bad" to "all those (that I haven't even seen) are bad."

> This isn't even close to the best we've got.

If you've got that then show me and I'll have a look. Until then I'm going with that studies I've seen that all seem to say roughly the same thing (despite widely varying sample sizes and quality of methodology)

1. https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-g...

Post reply on HN