JimPAX Level 1 9:55 AM

13 Responses to A Google cautionary tale.

1. Just Dave says:

   July 25, 2011 at 10:29 am

   That’s more than a little scary, especially since when given the choice I use Google as my platform for just about everything.
2. JimPAX says:

   July 25, 2011 at 10:52 am

   Here are the responses to my forum post.

   Stoney
   Top Contributor
   10:07 AM
   Hi JimPAX,

   Just setting up IMAP is usually not a problem. Sometimes, trying to download a large number of messages at once can cause a temporary lockout.

   If you can tell me, more exactly, the message you see when trying to sign in it might help to know your problem and determine how to proceed.

   This was posted 15 minutes after my original post. I pasted in the error message from above, and got this response.

   Stoney
   Top Contributor
   10:31 AM
   JimPAX,

   Although downloading a lot of messages via IMAP can be a valid use it can also signal a hacked account. Your lockdown should end in less that 24 hours. Let me know if you still have access problems after that time period has expired.

   And here is my final response.

   JimPAX
   Level 1
   10:47 AM
   Edit
   This is a scary comment for those of us who have set up a large amount of their data to be in Google’s care. I understand that this is a mindless algorithm that I have run afoul of, but I did so doing fairly normal things.

   What distresses me the most is I am realizing how beholden I am to Google to be productive. With this lock down, I am effectively cut off from correspondence, some social networking, and thousands of my documents that as of now, only live on Google servers. For all of that to be removed from my control over an algorithm’s decision that I am behaving abnormally is frightening, frustrating, and ultimately unacceptable.

   I understand that with the huge amount of data involved and the vulnerability to attack that this engenders, algorithms are a necessary part of Google’s security. What I DON’T understand is why there is not a direct, and relatively swift way to correct these problems. “Wait 24 hours until it fixes itself,” is not ok.

   And what if it doesn’t? I’ve read the horror stories. Who ultimately is responsible for maintaining any customer service? And please don’t tell me about how free Google is. They have built their empire on “free” services and maintain their hold on the digital world precisely because of users like me who have come to depend on them for data and communication management. I am not unreasonable in expecting a more satisfying level of customer service.

   As of 10:50, my gmail account has been unlocked. But that doesn’t fix the problem.
3. Dan Someone says:

   July 25, 2011 at 11:00 am

   If they’re going to have automated systems to monitor for bad behavior, they really need to have some human oversight – which requires contactable humans to work out false positives. This is ridiculous.
4. JimPAX says:

   July 25, 2011 at 11:07 am

   Fun side note: The top conversation in my gmail inbox was notifications about replies to my forum post.

   Oh, delicious irony.
5. Tom K says:

   July 25, 2011 at 11:09 am

   Wow…you never believe the stories about lockouts until it happens to someone you know. This lack of accountability and ability to contact a representative, really stinks.
6. JimPAX says:

   July 25, 2011 at 11:22 am

   Are you a Google+ user? This article points out how Google’s incredibly narrow tolerance of content could have dire consequences for your entire account.

   This is another example of the problem. If I post a link on Google+ to an article that turns out to have someone’s definition of NSFW or offensive language, I have exposed my entire Google existence to being shut down. So what Google decides is bad behavior in one sphere causes a user to lose access to everything.

   While I’m not ready to delete my Google+ account yet over this, it will certainly have a chilling effect on my usage.
7. Valerie says:

   July 25, 2011 at 11:27 am

   I’m feeling righteous wrath about Google right now, so I’m copying what I just chatted to Jim here for others to see:

   I deleted my G+ account. Not so much because of Jim’s experience – which seems unrelated to G+ – but because clearly Google+ has a philosophy about pseudonyms and about adult content that is not consistent with my online life. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/violetblue/google-plus-fast-cheap-and-out-of-control/557?tag=mantle_skin;content

   Not that I was planning to share adult content with my “real name” G+ account. But it’s the principle of the thing. I don’t need to be slut-shamed by Google. If Google can’t wrap their head around the fact that there are good, legitimate reasons to maintain online IDs that are separate from your real name, then I have little use for their social networking.
8. Valerie says:

   July 25, 2011 at 12:16 pm

   Some more interesting stuff from Skud’s blog:

   As far as I know, people are not losing access to all their Google services simply for using a name that Google doesn’t like. I have not yet heard of a single documentable case of this. (A documentable case would involve a G+ profile page that looks like this and contains the words, “we determined that the name you provided violates our Community Standards.”)

   What I have heard is that many people are losing access to all Google services for some form of ill-defined “violation of our Terms of Service”. This is getting conflated with the names issue, and it’s not surprising. Google’s communication is weak, and they don’t tell you exactly what TOS you broke, so it’s easy to think it must be the name-related thing you’re hearing about happening to other people.

   Some other considerations:

   Google+’s TOS forbids a range of content including “spam”, “hate speech”, “copyright”, and so-called NSFW content but nobody’s quite sure where the lines are or how it’s enforced, so it might be that you’re getting shut down for content violations you didn’t expect.

   Google+ allows anyone to report an account for abuse. While it’s unclear how those reports are escalated or how many of them are needed to lead to account suspension, if the bar is set too low (as it seems to be), this can lead to many capricious suspensions. (If you thought DMCA takedown notices could be used inappropriately to harass or intimidate, consider that Google+ only requires someone — anyone, not even the copyright holder — to click a button that says “copyright” to achieve the same effect.)

   Google+ has no facility for “warnings” prior to suspension. Other services (even Google-run Youtube) typically freeze/hide/take down specific content, or send you a warning telling you that you must do so yourself, rather than suspend an entire account with no warning.

   There is no clear understanding of the scope and range of TOS enforcement. Does TOS violation on one Google service result in losing access to that one service, or to multiple services? This doesn’t seem to have been well thought through.

   The last point is an important one. As Google encourages people to consolidate more and more of their online lives in Google services, it’s going to be increasingly important for Google to maintain separation between services when it comes to TOS enforcement. You shouldn’t lose access to your email and documents just because you posted a risque picture on Google+ or a fan video to Youtube, any more than you should have your car towed for not paying your phone bill.

   So, to sum up: as far as I can tell, people are not losing access to GMail and other services for using the wrong name on Google+, but they are losing access to those services for a cluster of other reasons which relate closely to the names problem.
9. JimPAX says:

   July 25, 2011 at 12:30 pm

   One element of all of this that I find baffling is that Google is trying for the third time to enter the social networking marketplace. Orkut was a huge bust outside of Brazil, and Wave was even worse.

   So why are they not taking more care to learn from their own mistakes as well as the mistakes of others? Facebook, for all it’s flaws, allows a much more open space to socialize. This brings different problems, but these problems are growth related. The poison that Google+ seems to be choosing is one that will lead to dissatisfaction and possibly defection at a time when they are trying to build a user base.

   As the article points out, these TOS issues do not need to be “nanny monitored.” Since I can more readily define my circles, I can tailor my posts for the folks who want to see them. And “muting” is an option for readers when I miss.

   As for copyright issues, Google has already demonstrated that they have a workable model for dealing with these issues with YouTube, a service that has a huge user base and more data uploaded every minute than I can even fathom. So it’s not a matter of size that prevents Google from using a more user-friendly approach to monitoring content.
10. Belton says:

    July 25, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    They need some way to rate content and allow people to opt out (or let parents opt out for their kids). Why not take advantage of crowd sourcing and let the users rate things?

    Security is necessary today with many attacks targeting Gmail and other Google products. Lets give them some time to work this out.

    I only have a toe in the water for G+. I would be happy to dump Facebook, but will see how Google manages their network. I will bet I am not alone in that attitude.
11. JimPAX says:

    July 25, 2011 at 1:28 pm

    I’m willing to give them time (indeed, I’m not fleeing from their services, just looking for alternatives and backups). The problem is not with their solution to spam and attacks. The problem is that they have no satisfactory way to deal with false-positives or questions about content suitability. They have been notoriously bad at customer service, taking a Microsoft-style approach; no direct support, but try finding the answer on your own.
12. Just Dave says:

    July 25, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    I’m on the fence. I don’t use GoogleDocs because the functionality is frankly not up to the standard I would need for work. Microsoft still does enterprise better. I couldn’t care less about Google+, it’s a thing that exists and so far has proven to be utterly useless to me. The thing that concerns me is e-mail account access. Everything useful to me in my digital life is wired through Google. It would take me months to update my e-mail address in all the relevant places.

    I’m surprised their customer service isn’t better. I know Apple is heinously bad about theirs, but I’d expect Google to do a better job. And the whole content suitability thing is nightmarish. If I don’t want to see certain content in my social networking, I will exclude it myself. I don’t need Google policing it for me.

13. Pingback: A Google cautionary tale. – The Awe of Understanding | chimac.net – Stuff worth knowing about