6 ms·
I think part of their reasoning is that if they publish the rulebook, then people will find ways to misuse the services in a roundabout way. It’s easier to find
by ImNotTheNSA 7y ago
I think part of their reasoning is that if they publish the rulebook, then people will find ways to misuse the services in a roundabout way. It’s easier to find bugs in source material you can see, than that you cannot.
I don’t agree with this, but I think it’s most likely the reasoning.
- pnw_hazor 7y agoAlso, they like to give special privileges to favored entities. Some of these special privileges would likely be counter to any published rules.
- brokenmachine 7y agoTrue, I think this is likely the real reason.
- tptacek 7y agoBecause that sounds right, or because you have particularized knowledge to back that claim up?
- brokenmachine 7y agoBecause it sounds right and seems like common-sense. I did put "I think" and "likely" in there so I would have thought it was obvious I was speculating. Do we need to ask everyone whether they have "particularized" knowledge for every comment they make?
- x0x0 7y agoAt least on ios, both uber [1] and facebook have clearly engaged in behavior that would get anyone else booted from the platform. I would bet a week's salary that google play is the same. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ceo-tim-cook-threatened-travis-kalanick-over-ubers-app-in-2015-2017-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ceo-tim-cook-threatene...
- brokenmachine 7y agoThey can have a catch-all at the end to cover those situations. They make the rules, so the rules can include, "you can be removed at the discretion of google" at the end.
- OJFord 7y agoIf it makes you feel better, you could view the current rules as consisting solely of that line?
- brokenmachine 7y agoLol, true. I was just suggesting an option if they care about portraying a facade of fairness. Probably unnecessary though.