8 ms·

I 100% don't trust that Google can handle this situation. I actually hope that this practice increases drastically so that Google will be forced to do something

I 100% don't trust that Google can handle this situation. I actually hope that this practice increases drastically so that Google will be forced to do something about this. Because right now, Google will just ignore the problem and let small publishers and ad purchasers suffer. There is no real customer support so it will happen little by little and nothing will change. Google needs a swift, firm kick in the ass to fix this otherwise they will ignore it completely.

lonelappde 7y ago
They could just stop serving to small publishers and purchasers? Would that make you happy?
- thomasz 7y ago
  No, they should be regulated.
zadkey 7y ago
I can't agree more. Google has some of the crappiest support around. A few lawsuits and some really bad publicity might make them change their tune.
- Analemma_ 7y ago
  > A few lawsuits and some really bad publicity might make them change their tune. I'm not sure about that. Google's crappy support is deeply, deeply embedded in their culture -- for all the benefits, it's one of the downsides of their PhD-heavy, engineering-first mentality, because engineers and academics loathe dealing with people, and to the extent that it's necessary for some system, regard that as a sign that system was improperly designed. Google would need a major culture shift to start having good support, and unfortunately it's the exact kind of culture shift that would anger and alienate a lot of Googlers. Don't count on this changing anytime soon.
  - kunglao 7y ago
    That's one lousy excuse for a corporation like Google. This has nothing to do with them being PhD-heavy or engineering-first? (what engineering-first are you referring to btw?) The reason for this is the nature of their business. It's a calculated decision by them in terms of how much is worth spending on support without taking an actual hit to their margins.
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  "A few lawsuits" is an so much an understatement that it might as well be a lie. You'd need one out of every few (13.75) people in the USA to successfully bring a $5k lawsuit against Google to reduce them from highly profitable to break-even. Lawsuits and bad publicity only matter if they're more costly than ignoring the problem. If the company in the article successfully sued for the $5,000 they were being extorted over that wouldn't even matter. A few of those lawsuits wouldn't matter. A few thousand of those lawsuits wouldn't even matter. The European Commission last year issued a massive lawsuit against Google Adsense of $1.6 billion [1]. Google marked that EC fine down in its SEC filings on page 86 of their 10-K [2]. European Commission fees constitute an effective tax of 1.0% in 2019, which they add to various other factors for a total tax rate of 13.3%. Page 89 shows that Google revenue was $160B, while expenses were $40B. Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune unless it's more profitable to do so. [1]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_1770 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_... [2]: https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/20200204_alphabet_10K.pdf https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/20200204_alphabet_10K.pd...
  - dhimes 7y ago
    Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune unless it's more profitable to do so. This is exactly how Microsoft grew evil.
  - MichaelDickens 7y ago
    You don't need to sue Google enough to completely eat up their profits, you just need to sue them enough that it becomes cheaper for them to staff a better customer service department.
  - goatinaboat 7y ago
    Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune We the community can fix this. Stop inviting Googlers to parties. Don’t go to their talks at conferences. Throw their resumes in the bin. Only when they know their behaviour is unacceptable will they start to get it.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  What I'm seeing is industry is doing the same thing to them that they did to Intel. Encapsulate them in a cyst like the body does to a parasitic worm. Basically all of their non ad ventures will fail due customers reflexively choosing their competitors products. Just like no one will pick Intel as a vendor outside of their core products.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
woodpanel 7y ago
I think the part of „Google will just ignore the problem“ is exactly what the scammers are counting on - knowing that their victims as well expect to be ignored.
dheera 7y ago
I agree. Google needs a formal, transparent process to dispute bans and investigate incidents. It hurts small publishers when their idiot machine learning algorithms issue bans with no recourse of action. I once had a location-based file sharing website banned by Google -- all Chrome browsers would pop up a warning. It actually potentially could have been monetized but I lost all the users due to Google's unexplained ban.
hoorayimhelping 7y ago
I'm a pretty libertarian minded guy and I generally think the federal government is too big and bloated, but this is exactly where they are needed. They need to start throwing their weight at Google and telling them if they don't start reigning in this kind of shit, they're going to get regulated to high hell then broken up. Google has shown time and again they do not care. I don't even know if they employ human support reps, I've never actually spoken to anyone who represents google other than recruiters.
- jngreenlee 7y ago
  Also libertarian minded....have you considered that in a natural state, businesses this large would be very hard to maintain? The fundamental business structure we have today is based around a government-sanctioned "personhood". If you could strip this away, there would be no corporate veil, and you could sue the person who failed to act (or whom acted wrongly) and did you wrong. Think of bankers at Wells Fargo creating false accounts in customer names...hire investigator or do your own, sue, discover, repeat...there would be MUCH MORE downside to bad behavior, even if the upside is there. I think personally that organizations like GORE would exist, and who knows what else might emerge...more co-ops? Of course this does require 3rd-party alternate court systems (maybe like cert issuers, but held to the same liability standard above?)...our current system cannot handle this, so it may be largely academic thoughts.
  - dontdoitpls 7y ago
    I've thought about how little risk people have doing business, but how much risk customers and the environment take by LLC licenses. Or how inflation forces people to grow at whatever expense/ethics necessary. Our 401ks have unethical companies getting pumped because tax advantages and monetary policy. I wonder if the free market would be safer and more conservative.
  - sfj 7y ago
    If you can be sued into oblivion for even starting a business, who would try? The corporate veil is intended to help the little guy.

lonelappde 7y ago

They could just stop serving to small publishers and purchasers? Would that make you happy?

thomasz 7y ago
No, they should be regulated.

zadkey 7y ago

I can't agree more. Google has some of the crappiest support around. A few lawsuits and some really bad publicity might make them change their tune.

Analemma_ 7y ago
> A few lawsuits and some really bad publicity might make them change their tune. I'm not sure about that. Google's crappy support is deeply, deeply embedded in their culture -- for all the benefits, it's one of the downsides of their PhD-heavy, engineering-first mentality, because engineers and academics loathe dealing with people, and to the extent that it's necessary for some system, regard that as a sign that system was improperly designed. Google would need a major culture shift to start having good support, and unfortunately it's the exact kind of culture shift that would anger and alienate a lot of Googlers. Don't count on this changing anytime soon.
- kunglao 7y ago
  That's one lousy excuse for a corporation like Google. This has nothing to do with them being PhD-heavy or engineering-first? (what engineering-first are you referring to btw?) The reason for this is the nature of their business. It's a calculated decision by them in terms of how much is worth spending on support without taking an actual hit to their margins.
LeifCarrotson 7y ago
"A few lawsuits" is an so much an understatement that it might as well be a lie. You'd need one out of every few (13.75) people in the USA to successfully bring a $5k lawsuit against Google to reduce them from highly profitable to break-even. Lawsuits and bad publicity only matter if they're more costly than ignoring the problem. If the company in the article successfully sued for the $5,000 they were being extorted over that wouldn't even matter. A few of those lawsuits wouldn't matter. A few thousand of those lawsuits wouldn't even matter. The European Commission last year issued a massive lawsuit against Google Adsense of $1.6 billion [1]. Google marked that EC fine down in its SEC filings on page 86 of their 10-K [2]. European Commission fees constitute an effective tax of 1.0% in 2019, which they add to various other factors for a total tax rate of 13.3%. Page 89 shows that Google revenue was $160B, while expenses were $40B. Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune unless it's more profitable to do so. [1]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_1770 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_... [2]: https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/20200204_alphabet_10K.pdf https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/20200204_alphabet_10K.pd...
- dhimes 7y ago
  Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune unless it's more profitable to do so. This is exactly how Microsoft grew evil.
- MichaelDickens 7y ago
  You don't need to sue Google enough to completely eat up their profits, you just need to sue them enough that it becomes cheaper for them to staff a better customer service department.
- goatinaboat 7y ago
  Google isn't moral, they don't see this fine as a mistake to be learned from. It's an operating expense. They won't change their tune We the community can fix this. Stop inviting Googlers to parties. Don’t go to their talks at conferences. Throw their resumes in the bin. Only when they know their behaviour is unacceptable will they start to get it.
Gibbon1 7y ago
What I'm seeing is industry is doing the same thing to them that they did to Intel. Encapsulate them in a cyst like the body does to a parasitic worm. Basically all of their non ad ventures will fail due customers reflexively choosing their competitors products. Just like no one will pick Intel as a vendor outside of their core products.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

woodpanel 7y ago

I think the part of „Google will just ignore the problem“ is exactly what the scammers are counting on - knowing that their victims as well expect to be ignored.

dheera 7y ago

I agree. Google needs a formal, transparent process to dispute bans and investigate incidents. It hurts small publishers when their idiot machine learning algorithms issue bans with no recourse of action. I once had a location-based file sharing website banned by Google -- all Chrome browsers would pop up a warning. It actually potentially could have been monetized but I lost all the users due to Google's unexplained ban.

hoorayimhelping 7y ago

I'm a pretty libertarian minded guy and I generally think the federal government is too big and bloated, but this is exactly where they are needed. They need to start throwing their weight at Google and telling them if they don't start reigning in this kind of shit, they're going to get regulated to high hell then broken up. Google has shown time and again they do not care. I don't even know if they employ human support reps, I've never actually spoken to anyone who represents google other than recruiters.

jngreenlee 7y ago
Also libertarian minded....have you considered that in a natural state, businesses this large would be very hard to maintain? The fundamental business structure we have today is based around a government-sanctioned "personhood". If you could strip this away, there would be no corporate veil, and you could sue the person who failed to act (or whom acted wrongly) and did you wrong. Think of bankers at Wells Fargo creating false accounts in customer names...hire investigator or do your own, sue, discover, repeat...there would be MUCH MORE downside to bad behavior, even if the upside is there. I think personally that organizations like GORE would exist, and who knows what else might emerge...more co-ops? Of course this does require 3rd-party alternate court systems (maybe like cert issuers, but held to the same liability standard above?)...our current system cannot handle this, so it may be largely academic thoughts.
- dontdoitpls 7y ago
  I've thought about how little risk people have doing business, but how much risk customers and the environment take by LLC licenses. Or how inflation forces people to grow at whatever expense/ethics necessary. Our 401ks have unethical companies getting pumped because tax advantages and monetary policy. I wonder if the free market would be safer and more conservative.
- sfj 7y ago
  If you can be sued into oblivion for even starting a business, who would try? The corporate veil is intended to help the little guy.