5 ms·

Rather than ascribing this to Google's maliciousness or overzealous use of power, is it possible that the shutdown was accidental?

NoPiece 9y ago
An accidental shutdown can still fall under overzealous use of power.
WithHighProb 9y ago
"accidental" launched a nuclear bomb...
seabird 9y ago
You're missing the point entirely; even if it was accidental, would you have access to your accounts? Would your email be a reliable way to reach you or verify your ownership of another account? Would people able to access the content you've posted? The answer is quite obviously "no," and that doesn't cut it for people need rely on services like these for their everyday workflow. We wouldn't consider "accidental" AWS downtime acceptable, so why will we accept it from Google?
- tazard 9y ago
  Wouldn't using ones own domain and gsuite alleviate some of these issues? If Google were to shut down your account, you could update your mx records to a different mail server such as fastmail or self hosted as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, and be back up and running relatively soon (of course you still wouldn't have your connected YouTube/G+ etc accounts). Although as I write this it occurred to me, you would likely loose all your contacts and calendar unless they were backed up prior...
jwilk 9y ago
After review, your account is not eligible to be reinstated due to a violation of our Terms of Service. Doesn't sound like an accident.
- pishpash 9y ago
  "After review, ..." -- signed, an algorithm. Google is not a human facing company, you're most likely conversing with a bot even when you don't think you are.
  - baybal2 9y ago
    >Google is not a human facing company, you're most likely conversing with a bot even when you don't think you are. In reality, all big dotcoms hire legions of human 'reviewers' in cheap countries distanced from the civilized world
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    Even if it is an algorithm: So? Just because an algorithm made the bad call doesn't mean it's OK.
xiaoma 9y ago
I didn't ascribe anything to malice, though I do miss the "Don't be evil" Google of the early 2000s. It's more an issue of mass automation and the errors that accompany it. This is a company with 93 billion dollars in cash on hand and billions of dollars of profit per quarter that doesn't even offer email support for forced closures of long standing accounts.
breadbox 9y ago
I think that's the point, actually. (Unless there's some political issue that I'm missing.) Google can make a simple mistake and the customer has to bear the burden of it. When something like this happens, there's no indication that Google will or even can address the mistake in a timely fashion -- or maybe not ever. Google's basic philosophy of no customer service for free products means there isn't much you can do, other than wait and hope, or raise a stink and hope.
dragonwriter 9y ago
Since it was supposedly reviewed and denied, it wasn't accidental. There may be mistakes of fact made by Google or different reasons than those the target has complained of, but the opacity of the process makes it impossible to determine either of those.
pishpash 9y ago
Although not terribly enlightening, we can still ascribe malice to an algorithm as a shorthand for its essential behavior. In the end it's a black box, can you rule out anything?

NoPiece 9y ago

An accidental shutdown can still fall under overzealous use of power.

WithHighProb 9y ago

"accidental" launched a nuclear bomb...

seabird 9y ago

You're missing the point entirely; even if it was accidental, would you have access to your accounts? Would your email be a reliable way to reach you or verify your ownership of another account? Would people able to access the content you've posted? The answer is quite obviously "no," and that doesn't cut it for people need rely on services like these for their everyday workflow. We wouldn't consider "accidental" AWS downtime acceptable, so why will we accept it from Google?

tazard 9y ago
Wouldn't using ones own domain and gsuite alleviate some of these issues? If Google were to shut down your account, you could update your mx records to a different mail server such as fastmail or self hosted as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, and be back up and running relatively soon (of course you still wouldn't have your connected YouTube/G+ etc accounts). Although as I write this it occurred to me, you would likely loose all your contacts and calendar unless they were backed up prior...

jwilk 9y ago

After review, your account is not eligible to be reinstated due to a violation of our Terms of Service. Doesn't sound like an accident.

pishpash 9y ago
"After review, ..." -- signed, an algorithm. Google is not a human facing company, you're most likely conversing with a bot even when you don't think you are.
- baybal2 9y ago
  >Google is not a human facing company, you're most likely conversing with a bot even when you don't think you are. In reality, all big dotcoms hire legions of human 'reviewers' in cheap countries distanced from the civilized world
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  Even if it is an algorithm: So? Just because an algorithm made the bad call doesn't mean it's OK.

xiaoma 9y ago

I didn't ascribe anything to malice, though I do miss the "Don't be evil" Google of the early 2000s. It's more an issue of mass automation and the errors that accompany it. This is a company with 93 billion dollars in cash on hand and billions of dollars of profit per quarter that doesn't even offer email support for forced closures of long standing accounts.

breadbox 9y ago

I think that's the point, actually. (Unless there's some political issue that I'm missing.) Google can make a simple mistake and the customer has to bear the burden of it. When something like this happens, there's no indication that Google will or even can address the mistake in a timely fashion -- or maybe not ever. Google's basic philosophy of no customer service for free products means there isn't much you can do, other than wait and hope, or raise a stink and hope.

dragonwriter 9y ago

Since it was supposedly reviewed and denied, it wasn't accidental. There may be mistakes of fact made by Google or different reasons than those the target has complained of, but the opacity of the process makes it impossible to determine either of those.

pishpash 9y ago

Although not terribly enlightening, we can still ascribe malice to an algorithm as a shorthand for its essential behavior. In the end it's a black box, can you rule out anything?