Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The odd thing is that they can't even make a cost argument for this. If they charged a cost recovery fee for human redress of these sorts of issues, it would not cost them anything, and that's assuming they don't lose money from improper automated enforcement, which they almost certainly do.

It's pure incompetence.




Why would I want to keep paying google for their shitty AI’s mistakes?


The alternative is being disappeared without recourse, if you have to pay 40 bucks when they screw up, it is what it is, and you can make a decision.


That is (morally) wrong on so many levels. It’s basically what regulations were invented for.


What would your brilliant regulation entail? Forcing companies to publish software for free when their automated systems think it's malware?

Could you even summarize a piece of legislation that doesn't amount to "describe Google, then make everything that annoys us about Google illegal for companies fitting that description"?


Apply anti-trust law as is currently written for starters. Standard Oil and Ma Bell were split for less egregious offenses than we've seen from Alphabet/Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon.

In Standard Oil's case, vertical integration across markets was enough, and pretty much everyone in Big Tech is guilty of this.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: