zlacker

So now banning people incorrectly is a revenue generator?

The answer is to force google to be open and more transparent through regulations and have to scale up to deal with it and eat into their profits.

The assumption up front should not be that we need to care about protecting their profits.

>>lamont+(OP)
Absurd but not new. Equifax was charging people to freeze their credit for a while after the breach, until public pressure mounted.

They probably made a TON of money off of that, and off the credit protection services they offer directly or through subsidiaries.

>>lamont+(OP)
> So now banning people incorrectly is a revenue generator?

It need not be, as long as the fee is less than the cost. It could be symbolic (say $1). But the problem is that it would be seen as a revenue generator whether it is or not.