4 ms·

As a big Android/Google fan, I can't say they are exactly innocent when it comes to the sort of thing Microsoft was called out for with Skydrive. When Google+

As a big Android/Google fan, I can't say they are exactly innocent when it comes to the sort of thing Microsoft was called out for with Skydrive. When Google+ first came out quite a lot of people lost their "Google lives" (including their gmail accounts they had been using for years) when Google banned them for being under 13 or using a pseudonym.

rlu 14y ago
Also wasn't there some controversy a few months ago (perhaps march? random guess) where someone lost their google life because of some adwords dispute? I think the issue got resolved because he was lucky enough to be a nerd which a blog that got picked up by HN/Techmeme etc. and then someone from Google personally fixed the problem. Most users would have been hosed. It also doesn't help that Google has no "real" customer support other than forums. As a user it would be extremely uncomfortable to lose your Google life and have no phone number to call. At least you can call Microsoft. Whether they can do anything about it is a different story but it at least will escalate easier, or at least I would imagine
magicalist 14y ago
The under 13 thing, as has been discussed before, is due to COPPA. Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they have to close your account and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate). As for the pseudonym thing, that never occurred. People lost their google+ accounts, but the rest was just forum posts saying things like, "I remember reading about someone..." without providing the actual citation.
- antidoh 14y ago
  No, they don't have to close the account, they choose to, rather than deal with the law's requirements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Pr... > While children under 13 can legally give out personal information with their parents' permission, many websites altogether disallow underage children from using their services due to the amount of paperwork involved.
  - magicalist 14y ago
    What distinction are you making here? They also choose to not give you infinite storage space for free and choose to not indemnify you for copyright infringement when you send ripped mp3s as attachments. Every company operating in the US has to decide if offering services to children is worth the extra regulatory oversight. If you'd like, I can rephrase, but the meaning is the same: Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they will be in violation of the law if they do not close your account, and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate).
    - antidoh 14y ago
      The law provides a way to offer accounts to under-13s. They don't have to close the account, they just choose to close it instead of complying with the added burden that would be required.
      - fpgeek 14y ago
        If providing the current set of GMail features (including price) is uneconomical for Google after support for under-13s is added (and, AFAIK, all of the external evidence we have suggests that it is), then you're making a distinction without a difference.
    - jellicle 14y ago
      I believe the point is that you're lying when you say, quote, "they have to close the account". Google could simply choose not to collect personal information on accounts of children. This would be, literally, one line of code to implement. They've chosen instead to ban children from Google services, which is in no way required by law.
      - zwily 14y ago
        Literally, one line of code? That's a pretty amazing claim. How familiar are you with Google's code?
- samspot 14y ago
  I was setting up my wife's account for youtube and accidentally put today's date in for her birthdate. I was immediately locked out and had to pay a fee to get her email back.
  - magicalist 14y ago
    and share how much the fee was... ("accepting and verifying a credit card number in connection with a transaction" is one of the COPPA approved methods of verifying adulthood)
    - codeka 14y ago
      It's 30 cents: http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1333913 http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&a...
      - samspot 14y ago
        That's a new policy, it was more when I did it. It was summer 2011 but I can't find an email reciept so I'm not completely sure. I believe it was between $2-$5 at the time. An expensive typo for sure.
notatoad 14y ago
nobody has ever lost their gmail account for using a pseudonym on G+.

rlu 14y ago

Also wasn't there some controversy a few months ago (perhaps march? random guess) where someone lost their google life because of some adwords dispute? I think the issue got resolved because he was lucky enough to be a nerd which a blog that got picked up by HN/Techmeme etc. and then someone from Google personally fixed the problem. Most users would have been hosed. It also doesn't help that Google has no "real" customer support other than forums. As a user it would be extremely uncomfortable to lose your Google life and have no phone number to call. At least you can call Microsoft. Whether they can do anything about it is a different story but it at least will escalate easier, or at least I would imagine

magicalist 14y ago

The under 13 thing, as has been discussed before, is due to COPPA. Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they have to close your account and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate). As for the pseudonym thing, that never occurred. People lost their google+ accounts, but the rest was just forum posts saying things like, "I remember reading about someone..." without providing the actual citation.

antidoh 14y ago
No, they don't have to close the account, they choose to, rather than deal with the law's requirements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Pr... > While children under 13 can legally give out personal information with their parents' permission, many websites altogether disallow underage children from using their services due to the amount of paperwork involved.
- magicalist 14y ago
  What distinction are you making here? They also choose to not give you infinite storage space for free and choose to not indemnify you for copyright infringement when you send ripped mp3s as attachments. Every company operating in the US has to decide if offering services to children is worth the extra regulatory oversight. If you'd like, I can rephrase, but the meaning is the same: Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they will be in violation of the law if they do not close your account, and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate).
  - antidoh 14y ago
    The law provides a way to offer accounts to under-13s. They don't have to close the account, they just choose to close it instead of complying with the added burden that would be required.
    - fpgeek 14y ago
      If providing the current set of GMail features (including price) is uneconomical for Google after support for under-13s is added (and, AFAIK, all of the external evidence we have suggests that it is), then you're making a distinction without a difference.
  - jellicle 14y ago
    I believe the point is that you're lying when you say, quote, "they have to close the account". Google could simply choose not to collect personal information on accounts of children. This would be, literally, one line of code to implement. They've chosen instead to ban children from Google services, which is in no way required by law.
    - zwily 14y ago
      Literally, one line of code? That's a pretty amazing claim. How familiar are you with Google's code?
samspot 14y ago
I was setting up my wife's account for youtube and accidentally put today's date in for her birthdate. I was immediately locked out and had to pay a fee to get her email back.
- magicalist 14y ago
  and share how much the fee was... ("accepting and verifying a credit card number in connection with a transaction" is one of the COPPA approved methods of verifying adulthood)
  - codeka 14y ago
    It's 30 cents: http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1333913 http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&a...
    - samspot 14y ago
      That's a new policy, it was more when I did it. It was summer 2011 but I can't find an email reciept so I'm not completely sure. I believe it was between $2-$5 at the time. An expensive typo for sure.

notatoad 14y ago

nobody has ever lost their gmail account for using a pseudonym on G+.