4 ms·

"The solution here is to never use a hidden or “privacy” card number with Google" Okay. I get the why, but not put that in your TOS or just block it by default

"The solution here is to never use a hidden or “privacy” card number with Google" Okay. I get the why, but not put that in your TOS or just block it by default then? Should save a huge amount of time/trouble on both sides.

kmeisthax 4y ago
Google has an internal policy of not talking about anything related to enforcement. They've banned and ghosted their own business partners, not to mention their own employees' husbands, with zero explanation. This isn't anything new either; you can find examples of it going all the way back to the company's founding. The underlying logic seems to be to lay traps and pitfalls for bad actors to fall into rather than having a transparent and evenly-enforced set of rules. i.e. if we tell scammers they can't use privacy cards, instead of just silently banning anyone who uses them, then how can we tell scams apart from real users?
- TimTheTinker 4y ago
  That's a pretty cynical outlook on their part. All of this is just a further reminder to me to avoid doing business with Google.
  - ROTMetro 4y ago
    - akimball 4y ago
      There is nothing inherently dishonest about coming to a conclusion which is adverse to Google. Google's interests are not coextensive with honesty.
MintPaw 4y ago
Because any card they banned would probably go out of business as such a policy spreads.
dimitrios1 4y ago
The goal is to capture as much revenue as possible. A company would never intentionally limit their revenue intake unless it was absolutely detrimental to the business. Inconveniencing the few customers who use these cards most likely doesn't show up on their radar.
- ospzfmbbzr 4y ago
  > The goal is to capture as much revenue as possible. A company would never intentionally limit their revenue intake unless it was absolutely detrimental to the business. Yes they would. Their goal is POWER and NOT dollars, which are worth less and less every day. Just like corporate controlled mass media, the goal is POWER and NOT dollars. Dollars are the plausible deniability -- "it's just for the money!" is a mis-direction. Using a privacy card is not an acceptable indicator of fraud or anything in a country with due process and a supposed presumption of innocence. This is about enforcing approved behaviors in the Corporate Nanny state.
  - dimitrios1 4y ago
    Money equals power in our society, so your theory is not cogent.
    - astrange 4y ago
      Google is constantly politically defeated by random old people in Mountain View with lots of free time. There is no amount of money you can spent to build an apartment building that might cast a shadow on their house one day a year.
      - someguydave 4y ago
        Yes but in that situation Google must act transparently in an open political forum rather than backstab people behind closed doors.
        4y ago
ericabiz 4y ago
Keeping in mind my perspective is as someone who helps clients with these—and I also have a tech company background, so I understand how anti-spam systems are built. I don’t have any inside knowledge. Google likely uses privacy cards as one signal of whether an account is spammy. If you’re a customer who spends $1M a month with Google and you add a Brex card, it’s going to be far less likely to trigger an account suspension. If, on the other hand, you’re this guy, with a brand new account and you start off with a privacy card, that puts their internal systems over the threshold for what they consider “spam” - bam, instant suspension. I don’t think this is personally fair to new customers. Unfortunately, Google is always going to be geared to large customers and not to smaller ones. Most smaller companies will never encounter this situation anyway since they will use hard cards.
- happymellon 4y ago
  It doesn't sound like they are new though. They use other Google services and have a history with Google, it's just the Ads service relationship that is new.
  - ericabiz 4y ago
    The Ads service has a different, and much more thorough and aggressive, anti-spam algorithm than most Google services.
- megous 4y ago
  If 50 ad impressions in half a day on an account they helped somenoe create a moment before ban is considered SPAM, then their SPAM detection systems are a bit lol, I guess.

kmeisthax 4y ago

Google has an internal policy of not talking about anything related to enforcement. They've banned and ghosted their own business partners, not to mention their own employees' husbands, with zero explanation. This isn't anything new either; you can find examples of it going all the way back to the company's founding. The underlying logic seems to be to lay traps and pitfalls for bad actors to fall into rather than having a transparent and evenly-enforced set of rules. i.e. if we tell scammers they can't use privacy cards, instead of just silently banning anyone who uses them, then how can we tell scams apart from real users?

TimTheTinker 4y ago
That's a pretty cynical outlook on their part. All of this is just a further reminder to me to avoid doing business with Google.
- ROTMetro 4y ago
  - akimball 4y ago
    There is nothing inherently dishonest about coming to a conclusion which is adverse to Google. Google's interests are not coextensive with honesty.

MintPaw 4y ago

Because any card they banned would probably go out of business as such a policy spreads.

dimitrios1 4y ago

The goal is to capture as much revenue as possible. A company would never intentionally limit their revenue intake unless it was absolutely detrimental to the business. Inconveniencing the few customers who use these cards most likely doesn't show up on their radar.

ospzfmbbzr 4y ago
> The goal is to capture as much revenue as possible. A company would never intentionally limit their revenue intake unless it was absolutely detrimental to the business. Yes they would. Their goal is POWER and NOT dollars, which are worth less and less every day. Just like corporate controlled mass media, the goal is POWER and NOT dollars. Dollars are the plausible deniability -- "it's just for the money!" is a mis-direction. Using a privacy card is not an acceptable indicator of fraud or anything in a country with due process and a supposed presumption of innocence. This is about enforcing approved behaviors in the Corporate Nanny state.
- dimitrios1 4y ago
  Money equals power in our society, so your theory is not cogent.
  - astrange 4y ago
    Google is constantly politically defeated by random old people in Mountain View with lots of free time. There is no amount of money you can spent to build an apartment building that might cast a shadow on their house one day a year.
    - someguydave 4y ago
      Yes but in that situation Google must act transparently in an open political forum rather than backstab people behind closed doors.
      - 4y ago

ericabiz 4y ago

Keeping in mind my perspective is as someone who helps clients with these—and I also have a tech company background, so I understand how anti-spam systems are built. I don’t have any inside knowledge. Google likely uses privacy cards as one signal of whether an account is spammy. If you’re a customer who spends $1M a month with Google and you add a Brex card, it’s going to be far less likely to trigger an account suspension. If, on the other hand, you’re this guy, with a brand new account and you start off with a privacy card, that puts their internal systems over the threshold for what they consider “spam” - bam, instant suspension. I don’t think this is personally fair to new customers. Unfortunately, Google is always going to be geared to large customers and not to smaller ones. Most smaller companies will never encounter this situation anyway since they will use hard cards.

happymellon 4y ago
It doesn't sound like they are new though. They use other Google services and have a history with Google, it's just the Ads service relationship that is new.
- ericabiz 4y ago
  The Ads service has a different, and much more thorough and aggressive, anti-spam algorithm than most Google services.
megous 4y ago
If 50 ad impressions in half a day on an account they helped somenoe create a moment before ban is considered SPAM, then their SPAM detection systems are a bit lol, I guess.