10 ms·

For counterpoint, they provide products like Gmail for free at point of use because the support costs are very low (amongst other factors). Would you prefer go

For counterpoint, they provide products like Gmail for free at point of use because the support costs are very low (amongst other factors). Would you prefer government change this balance by regulation, or let users decide what they want? Many users choose very cheap typical service with a small but real risk of misery. Perhaps it's because they don't understand how miserable it can get. It's important that the bad experiences see public light so people's choices are informed.

bluefirebrand 6y ago
Counter-counterpoint They provide products like gmail for free because it allows them insight into people's communication which they can then leverage with search and ad networking to make way more than they could simply selling email services.
- robotresearcher 6y ago
  Sure, that's absolutely true. But the margin would be eroded if they provided much better customer service for unpaid Gmail. At some service level, the margin would be negative.
  - bluefirebrand 6y ago
    This is a bit of a tautology. Of course if they spend more on service than the service makes them the margin is negative. But let's not lose sight of the fact this is one of the biggest companies in the world we are talking about. A company that could probably treat the entire GDP of a small country as a rounding error. That margin you're referring to is very likely enormous and even if it cost them 10% of said margin to offer better service for it, they would still be making absurd amounts of money.
  - rsj_hn 6y ago
    IMO the problem is the dismissive attitude towards human support where it is viewed only as a roadblock to "scale". Being able to provide good support is a difficult skill to acquire and maintain, and most companies struggle with doing it regardless of how much they spend. You cannot get good support by throwing money at the problem any more than you can get good engineering -- it's a necessary but not sufficent condition. Moreover being able to provide good support requires a customer focus, attention to detail, and focus on quality that was never part of Google's DNA, and which Google prides itself as not caring about. To make Google into even a decent support company that creates as good of a support experience as Amazon (which is years ahead of Google) would require much more than higher margins, it would require a total rework of the corporate culture, leadership team, hiring policies, internal training and communications, etc. That's hard to do at a company that has such a dismissive attitude towards its user base, primarily because historically the real customers are advertisers and users are the product. It's hard to transition to more of an Amazon model where the end users were always the customers and the business was built around that understanding.
- strombofulous 6y ago
  Google has not done that in many years. "These ads are shown to you based on your online activity while you're signed into Google. We will not scan or read your Gmail messages to show you ads." https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en
  - minikites 6y ago
    But the reason they created it was so they could. It doesn't matter that they changed their mind later.
  - bluefirebrand 6y ago
    All this shows me is that Google pinky promises that they don't do that. Even if they don't scan the contents of your email bodies, you don't think they know who you are getting emails from, who you are emailing, and a boatload of info about who you do business with and such as a result? I'm betting they do.
    - username90 6y ago
      Google engineers aren't exactly known to be loyal to the company, if Google didn't keep their promises about stuff like this I'm pretty sure it would get leaked quickly.
      - bluefirebrand 6y ago
        The language of the "promise" is such that there is a lot of gray area and there is a lot of information contained with an email that is not the "message" of the email. Do you honestly think they just blindly deliver emails and don't take even a single scrap of data from them for their own benefit? The biggest data aggregator on the planet is just ignoring all of that data? Ok.
        username90 6y ago
        > Do you honestly think they just blindly deliver emails and don't take even a single scrap of data from them for their own benefit? The biggest data aggregator on the planet is just ignoring all of that data? Yes, here is the official statement: > Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change. This decision brings Gmail ads in line with how we personalize ads for other Google products. https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in-the-enterprise-g-suites-gmail-and-consumer-gmail-to-more-closely-align/ https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in... Edit: The problem with google is that they collect a lot of data they can abuse, not that they are particularly known to abuse data. So the danger is that their policies change while still having your data, then there is nothing you can do.
- gerash 6y ago
  I'm all for regulations to avoid these account closures with no recourse. That said, why do people care so much about Google using Gmail data for ad. You either trust Google or not. If you are convinced that random humans won't read your private emails for fun and giggles then why should I care if their regexes or neural networks are fed my emails or my search history? The only downside is if someone is watching your screen, certain ads can reveal the content of your emails in that scenario. Google should simply provide a paid version for all its services in case people dislike ads but whether their code runs on my gmail or Google Drive content doesn't matter that much to me.
  - bluefirebrand 6y ago
    > why do people care so much about Google using Gmail data for ad. What does this have to do with anything I said? I never made a judgement of it being bad or good. I just pointed out that probably Google isn't providing Gmail as a free service out of any kind of charity
    - gerash 6y ago
      I assumed you're implying mal intentions. Otherwise, sure it is ad supported and not a charity.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
MikeUt 6y ago
Would I prefer government enforce food safety standards, or let consumers decide what they want? Would I prefer government enforce building safety codes, or let consumers decide what they want? Would I completely ignore the fact that Google has sucked the air out of the room with their market dominance, so hardly any competitors are left for consumers to decide between?
- robotresearcher 6y ago
  I don't think public safety standards are the same thing as support level for free email, subscription music, etc. We can all easily name multiple email and subscription music providers.
  - MikeUt 6y ago
    What about giant app stores that control almost all consumer spending in those markets? How many businesses can survive being banned by both Apple and Google's stores? Or even by just one? Sure your business is destroyed, but you're right, you can easily get a new email address.
    - robotresearcher 6y ago
      Just to be clear, you are talking about the quality of b2b services, between parties that have entered a business relationship, not consumer protection.
      - MikeUt 6y ago
        b2b issues greatly affect consumers - there's no fabled "consumer choice" if a handful of businesses are allowed to dominate or decide who may enter their market/app store. And when so many businesses are at the mercy of a few giant companies, we probably shouldn't deny them protection with the "it's a b2b matter" dismissal.
- II2II 6y ago
  The first and second case deals with issues that are mostly opaque to the consumer and affects their safety. The third case is not actually a singular case. When we are talking about consumer facing services, there are many competitors in most cases. I suspect that it would even be difficult to make anti-trust arguments since the factors that funnel people towards Google is largely outside of Google's control. Google's behaviour towards businesses is a different matter. While businesses may turn to the competition, their dominance means that avoiding Google will have negative consequences.
malinens 6y ago
Actually their support in gmail is non-existing. I work for European regional free e-mail provider (also ad supported) and we have free phone support for free users where You can talk to real support people who know product in 5 different languages. Google abuses it's dominant power by making basically impossible to get support

bluefirebrand 6y ago

Counter-counterpoint They provide products like gmail for free because it allows them insight into people's communication which they can then leverage with search and ad networking to make way more than they could simply selling email services.

robotresearcher 6y ago
Sure, that's absolutely true. But the margin would be eroded if they provided much better customer service for unpaid Gmail. At some service level, the margin would be negative.
- bluefirebrand 6y ago
  This is a bit of a tautology. Of course if they spend more on service than the service makes them the margin is negative. But let's not lose sight of the fact this is one of the biggest companies in the world we are talking about. A company that could probably treat the entire GDP of a small country as a rounding error. That margin you're referring to is very likely enormous and even if it cost them 10% of said margin to offer better service for it, they would still be making absurd amounts of money.
- rsj_hn 6y ago
  IMO the problem is the dismissive attitude towards human support where it is viewed only as a roadblock to "scale". Being able to provide good support is a difficult skill to acquire and maintain, and most companies struggle with doing it regardless of how much they spend. You cannot get good support by throwing money at the problem any more than you can get good engineering -- it's a necessary but not sufficent condition. Moreover being able to provide good support requires a customer focus, attention to detail, and focus on quality that was never part of Google's DNA, and which Google prides itself as not caring about. To make Google into even a decent support company that creates as good of a support experience as Amazon (which is years ahead of Google) would require much more than higher margins, it would require a total rework of the corporate culture, leadership team, hiring policies, internal training and communications, etc. That's hard to do at a company that has such a dismissive attitude towards its user base, primarily because historically the real customers are advertisers and users are the product. It's hard to transition to more of an Amazon model where the end users were always the customers and the business was built around that understanding.
strombofulous 6y ago
Google has not done that in many years. "These ads are shown to you based on your online activity while you're signed into Google. We will not scan or read your Gmail messages to show you ads." https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en
- minikites 6y ago
  But the reason they created it was so they could. It doesn't matter that they changed their mind later.
- bluefirebrand 6y ago
  All this shows me is that Google pinky promises that they don't do that. Even if they don't scan the contents of your email bodies, you don't think they know who you are getting emails from, who you are emailing, and a boatload of info about who you do business with and such as a result? I'm betting they do.
  - username90 6y ago
    Google engineers aren't exactly known to be loyal to the company, if Google didn't keep their promises about stuff like this I'm pretty sure it would get leaked quickly.
    - bluefirebrand 6y ago
      The language of the "promise" is such that there is a lot of gray area and there is a lot of information contained with an email that is not the "message" of the email. Do you honestly think they just blindly deliver emails and don't take even a single scrap of data from them for their own benefit? The biggest data aggregator on the planet is just ignoring all of that data? Ok.
      - username90 6y ago
        > Do you honestly think they just blindly deliver emails and don't take even a single scrap of data from them for their own benefit? The biggest data aggregator on the planet is just ignoring all of that data? Yes, here is the official statement: > Consumer Gmail content will not be used or scanned for any ads personalization after this change. This decision brings Gmail ads in line with how we personalize ads for other Google products. https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in-the-enterprise-g-suites-gmail-and-consumer-gmail-to-more-closely-align/ https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in... Edit: The problem with google is that they collect a lot of data they can abuse, not that they are particularly known to abuse data. So the danger is that their policies change while still having your data, then there is nothing you can do.
gerash 6y ago
I'm all for regulations to avoid these account closures with no recourse. That said, why do people care so much about Google using Gmail data for ad. You either trust Google or not. If you are convinced that random humans won't read your private emails for fun and giggles then why should I care if their regexes or neural networks are fed my emails or my search history? The only downside is if someone is watching your screen, certain ads can reveal the content of your emails in that scenario. Google should simply provide a paid version for all its services in case people dislike ads but whether their code runs on my gmail or Google Drive content doesn't matter that much to me.
- bluefirebrand 6y ago
  > why do people care so much about Google using Gmail data for ad. What does this have to do with anything I said? I never made a judgement of it being bad or good. I just pointed out that probably Google isn't providing Gmail as a free service out of any kind of charity
  - gerash 6y ago
    I assumed you're implying mal intentions. Otherwise, sure it is ad supported and not a charity.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

MikeUt 6y ago

Would I prefer government enforce food safety standards, or let consumers decide what they want? Would I prefer government enforce building safety codes, or let consumers decide what they want? Would I completely ignore the fact that Google has sucked the air out of the room with their market dominance, so hardly any competitors are left for consumers to decide between?

robotresearcher 6y ago
I don't think public safety standards are the same thing as support level for free email, subscription music, etc. We can all easily name multiple email and subscription music providers.
- MikeUt 6y ago
  What about giant app stores that control almost all consumer spending in those markets? How many businesses can survive being banned by both Apple and Google's stores? Or even by just one? Sure your business is destroyed, but you're right, you can easily get a new email address.
  - robotresearcher 6y ago
    Just to be clear, you are talking about the quality of b2b services, between parties that have entered a business relationship, not consumer protection.
    - MikeUt 6y ago
      b2b issues greatly affect consumers - there's no fabled "consumer choice" if a handful of businesses are allowed to dominate or decide who may enter their market/app store. And when so many businesses are at the mercy of a few giant companies, we probably shouldn't deny them protection with the "it's a b2b matter" dismissal.
II2II 6y ago
The first and second case deals with issues that are mostly opaque to the consumer and affects their safety. The third case is not actually a singular case. When we are talking about consumer facing services, there are many competitors in most cases. I suspect that it would even be difficult to make anti-trust arguments since the factors that funnel people towards Google is largely outside of Google's control. Google's behaviour towards businesses is a different matter. While businesses may turn to the competition, their dominance means that avoiding Google will have negative consequences.

malinens 6y ago

Actually their support in gmail is non-existing. I work for European regional free e-mail provider (also ad supported) and we have free phone support for free users where You can talk to real support people who know product in 5 different languages. Google abuses it's dominant power by making basically impossible to get support