It’s good that I’ve never stored important data in Google Drive, I have everything locally on a PC or flash drives.
I guess more lessons like this are still needed. If you got your only copies in the cloud you don’t seem to really care.
I’m assuming they weren’t his only copies since he had to upload them from somewhere but losing his Google account is probably really bad because you imagine how many things you have tied to your Gmail address or whatever and how much you might lose access to
Ohh absolutely, fuck google. It is insane how dependant we are on these companies that can willy nilly f*** us over.
I won an attempted DMCA takedown on YouTube over my own music.
It’s a really good feeling when you beat a troll-thief.
It wasn’t even that difficult, my music dated back 10+ years before the accuser’s. All I had to do was tell the bot to check the date of my video.
This is probably a stupid/naive question, but why doesn’t the bot do that in the first place?
A) Because it’s a stupid-ass LLM
B) Because someone made a report, and that’s what the LLM is paying attention to
Yes, I printed out the report with the intention of putting it in a picture frame someday. It has the name of the firm and alleged copyright holder.
Needless to say, yours truly is still going strong. Not to D O X myself, but I’m not very famous in most places so I won’t bother unless you really would like to know ;) It’s available on all the stuff, tho.
Lurkers; tis not my username
It requires cognitive thinking to question directive, something you just proved you have ~ a thing a bot cannot do
The author’s own intellectual property was deemed a violation, and the appeal mechanisms turned out to be opaque—they formally exist, but in practice, getting a decision reversed with automated review is nearly impossible.
That sounds about right. Unlike brick-and-mortar stores of the past, no company needs to answer to you now. Doesn’t matter if you’re a paying customer, you can’t bribe Google to care about you. The only thing that could work is bad publicity on social media, at best.
Services like IFTTT allow Ring doorbells to sync footage directly to Google Drive, creating a potential attack vector that users rarely consider.
The theoretical scenario works like this: if a malicious actor wanted to trigger a Google account ban, they could expose an internet-connected camera to intentionally problematic content, knowing the footage would automatically upload to the target’s Drive.
I love how technology has made our lives easier.
The only thing that could work is bad publicity on social media, at best.
Why should Google care about customer’s rants when it has the duopoly on mobile phones and contracts with governments?
Google is evil
Google has forever been notorious for “no support”. No number to call, no online agents, just help pages… which mostly redirect back to themselves. Even GCP, their cloud, does this. Unless you pay for premium top tier support you’re on your own. This scenario is that in practice. There is no one to appeal to, no one to talk to, there’s nothing. You build your life around something like an email address, then suddenly the entire ecosystem is gone.
When we talk about degoogling, it’s not just for tinfoilhat privacy/rights issues, it’s this case too. You literally cannot control your own fate. They can (and obviously do) take down accounts.
For anyone (I know probably not here, but think family and friends) who think that they would just appeal and somehow they would get a human, literally what is the benefit to Google to reinstate you? In their eyes you’re officially a risk, something that potentially governments, police departments, and lawyers would be interested in. It’s a risk they don’t want to take to allow you back on. Appealing even in the best cases will probably not go your way.
Did nobody else here reading this (assuming anyone else actually has or will) notice that the article is plainly written by an LLM – and the thumbnail generated too?
It’s a garbage content mill.
