Live data from Hacker News

Google just shut down our $1M business

news.ycombinator.com

71–80 of 88 posts

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#71
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "mansplain" just being used to mean "explain in a condescending way" in this context?

I always took "mansplain" to be an explanation taken to be delivered in a condescending way because of the genders of the speaker and receiver in question. The use of the term in and of itself usually saying more about the person using the word than the subject of the offense.

> because of the genders of the speaker and receiver in question

That's what I was trying to understand. ChatGPT doesn't have a gender, nor is it aware of the gender of the person talking to it, unless explicitly told. Wouldn't that preclude it from mansplaining?

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#73
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. It misses the ironic 'thanks to HN advice' point, and more importantly it mixes up suspensions (if I understand correctly): the main ads account was not suspended again *. First the secondary ads account was suspended and only then the main ads account. * This proves ChatGPT has no world model. If it had one, it would have been aware that undoing a Google suspension is impossible, therefore no account can be sus…

I got -3 for asking that question, I guess there are more people that do text summarizing for a living than I expected on HN. It missing the ironic point isn't that big of a deal in a summary tbh, I wouldn't have included that either. Your other point stands though, that's an important detail to get right ä.

> I got -3 for asking that question, I guess there are more people that do text summarizing for a living than I expected on HN.

I think it's because people are leery of threads being taken over by GPT produced comments. But so long as the requests/GPT comments/ are clearly marked, not too many, and with some justification for the request, I don't mind.

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I closed my paid account, they claimed I owe them money, and the only way of replying is to log in with said non-existent account. What about sending them a physical, certified letter? Have your lawyer write it.

Their only legal address is in the US. I'm in the UK, and stopped short of looking for a solicitor who would be able to handle this. I'm still considering filing a complaint with the UK Telecoms regulator 'Ofcom'. The punchline is that the American collections agency they use actually do respond to email and (I believe) dealt with it. But for it to go as far as a collections agency was nuts.

Don't they have a legal address in the UK, like for tax purposes?

> I'm still considering filing a complaint with the UK Telecoms regulator 'Ofcom'.

You should!

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#75
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this particular case, it seems easier said than done? OP did put eggs in different basquet ( social medias ) but Google will be Google right? What would be the alternative.

> What would be the alternative That's the point, there is not alternative at the moment. Breaking up monopolies allows competition and an alternative provider when something like this happens.

Gotcha, yes. Or a least regulate the said monopoly so they provide clear and open guidelines in regard to their policies.

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this particular case, it seems easier said than done? OP did put eggs in different basquet ( social medias ) but Google will be Google right? What would be the alternative.

Anti-Trust Legislation.

I’m surprised to see that sentiment echoed several times on HN. I’m all about it.

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their only legal address is in the US. I'm in the UK, and stopped short of looking for a solicitor who would be able to handle this. I'm still considering filing a complaint with the UK Telecoms regulator 'Ofcom'. The punchline is that the American collections agency they use actually do respond to email and (I believe) dealt with it. But for it to go as far as a collections agency was nuts.

Don't they have a legal address in the UK, like for tax purposes? > I'm still considering filing a complaint with the UK Telecoms regulator 'Ofcom'. You should!

Nope. I was doing business with Google Ireland. For a while we were all in the EU though...

But the threatening emails came from Mountain View.

This page is all you get: https://support.google.com/faqs/answer/6151275

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't they have a legal address in the UK, like for tax purposes? > I'm still considering filing a complaint with the UK Telecoms regulator 'Ofcom'. You should!

Nope. I was doing business with Google Ireland. For a while we were all in the EU though... But the threatening emails came from Mountain View. This page is all you get: https://support.google.com/faqs/answer/6151275

That shouldn't stop you from contacting Google Ireland. They are part of the same company and are their local legal presence after all. If you send them a certified letter and they sign for it, that's it.

Re: Google just shut down our $1M business

#80
post #11

> We will (barely) survive That a single company, in an unrelated market (ads), merely refusing to do business with you, can almost bankrupt you, means it's time for trust-busting. No single company should have such power.

If it wasn't for Google, millions of businesses would never have had a chance to exist, because they didn't have anywhere near the initial budget or right political connections to reach their customers through traditional media. It is a terrible power they have in their hands, but it is leagues better than what was before. But I think it is outrageous how they mistreat important customers like OP and let some petty e…

But it isn't really Google you are all praising. It's the company that bought them. They just go around using their name because it would have failed if they'd done otherwise.

Companies today are just like life. They don't care about the individual. Just like Life has no problem killing a young innocent child with cancer, Google has no problem killing a thriving business with policy.

For every one person who got a chance, a thousand more were taken away. Such is life, and everyone plays a role not any one place or person. If you want answers on why you got the short end of the stick, you might want to re-evaluate whether you should be spending time worrying about it in the first place.

Unless you are endeavoring in the same business path again, I'd invest my time in retraining and rebuilding rather than getting answers you feel you are owed.

I often ask myself why things are this way, but they are and no amount of getting frustrated will ever help. Even though I might be fully entitled from my point of view, even if I had the worst possible life ever, even if I deserved justice more than anyone else on the planet--it wouldn't matter. Never happens, take it from someone who has been at the absolute lowest and highest and online since the beginning.

Oh right, and the millennials I hate to say it are going to end this world anyway. Everyone knows history will repeat, even if it takes a bit longer to do so this time around. Oh my, I am getting so off topic it hurts, sorry 'bout that!

Post reply on HN