6 ms·
> If every abuser requests those explanations (which they will) It's not a request, it's a requirement. If your account is suspended, you deserve an explanatio
by _qulr 6y ago
> If every abuser requests those explanations (which they will)
It's not a request, it's a requirement. If your account is suspended, you deserve an explanation. You should get one without having to request it.
I'm not saying that companies shouldn't be able to suspend accounts temporarily. I'm simply saying that there needs to be a way to get your account unsuspended if you're innocent. The way it "works" now is that innocent consumers are without any recourse whatsoever.
- daemin 6y agoI heard on a podcast recently that a trading system needs to keep logs of why a particular trade was executed for several years just in case the authority wants it. So it isn't too much effort to build a similar report or log of behaviour to explain why someone was banned. Obviously this will also help the spammers who will use this information to get around the filters.
- daemin 6y agoPodcast link: https://www.twoscomplement.org/ https://www.twoscomplement.org/, I think it was the latest episode.
- gibspaulding 6y agoComplete speculation because I don't actually know how this works, but I wonder if the explanation would be something like this: "You've been banned because our black box ML algorithm says your usage patterns share similar traits to those of known spammers."
- p410n3 6y agoThats kinda what the PayPal support told me when I asked why half of my in-store payments via Google Pay get rejected. Most were payments of about 2€ in the same store next to work. Whatever I dont use it anymore
- BlueTemplar 6y agoSome government decisions are indirectly forbidden from using black box "algorithms" because they are obligated by law to explain (on demand) the steps that the algorithm took to reach its decision. Maybe something like this should also apply to some private companies ?
- AshamedCaptain 6y agoFor the record, they don't give away these explanations because such explanation would hint the spammer to what they should _not_ do next time, to avoid getting caught. Same as with anticheat software.
- _qulr 6y ago> they don't give away these explanations because such explanation would hint the spammer to what they should _not_ do next time We've heard this excuse countless times, but it's simply not acceptable. The foundation of our legal system is that it's better to let a criminal go than to punish an innocent person. How many innocents have to get caught in the crossfire before we start protecting them?
- PaulHoule 6y agoThis isnt criminal law. This is the right a private property owner (say the owner of a bar) has to kick you out. There are some limits on that (e.g. a restaurant can't kick black people out) but for the most part a business that doesnt want your business doesnt have to serve you, right or wrong.
- ethbr0 6y agoThe reason people are incensed about FAANGMP doing so is because, in their respective markets, they're monopolies. No one would care if Google banning a developer meant they could list their app through a non-Play app store with decent exposure, or a non-App Store at all. But that's not the reality we live in. So it's more like if Walmart moved into my podunk town, put all the local shops out of business, and then banned me.
- PaulHoule 6y agoHmmmm. I thought it was Apple that banned sideloading. Maybe Google kicked this guy out for the same reason they fired off their own Stadia devs.
- rukshn 6y agoI think we give up on that when we agree to the rule Google has the right to suspend, remove your account without prior notice I'm sure there should be a clause like that in their TOS