archive.ph
archive.ph
  • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    27·
    6 months ago

    Hmmh. Good reminder not to rely on these cloud services too much. And I mean the terms and services are kinda vague and enforced by a (rogue) AI. She could have stored murder mystery stories to the same effect.

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      20·
      6 months ago

      Google loves to have entirely ai-driven moderation which makes decisions that are impossible to appeal. They are certain that one AI team lead is more valuable than 20 customer service agents. Meanwhile, YouTube shorts is still a pipeline to Nazidom and death by electrical fire.

      Might be the worst customer service in the tech industry, though that’s a highly competitive title.

      They also don’t offer replacement parts (even major parts like the charging case) for their headphones. So I guess they’re intended to be a disposable product. Evil shit.

      If you’ve ever had an entirely positive interaction with Google customer service… you’d probably be the first.

      • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
        7·
        6 months ago

        They’re fairly known to do this. For YouTube creators it’s been this way for years. With nobody at the other side, just AI. Every now and then some YouTuber makes a video how they were able to restore their account against all odds.

        I mean with that it’s bad because peoples livelihood is on the line. But also getting a regular Google account can have serious consequences. People use it to login to other services, have half their lives stored there and their phones connected.

        And I think there is a general push towards AI powered customer support. I’m afraid in 10 years it’ll be very hard to reach anyone that can help you if it’s not the standard procedure. And it’ll be more a sci-fi dystopia. With most companies and contracts.

      • seang96@spgrn.com
        1·
        6 months ago

        I thought you could buy replacement parts of headphones I remember seeing prices listed somewhere.

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      3·
      6 months ago

      Reading the article, it’s not the content that caused the ban but sharing it to too many people (her beta readers) she was seen as a spammer.

      • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
        1·
        6 months ago

        Hmmh. That is about a different author who said that on Instagram. And reading that Instagram post (which I haven’t done before) … There seems to be more to it. Sharing documents with explicit content with multiple people seems to be the issue. And that’d align with my experience. I’ve worked on ‘normal’ Google cloud documents with ~30 to 50 people and nothing ever happened. That could be coincidence but I suppose lots of people do that. Maybe it’s really the combination of the two factors.