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

That isn't how you deal with fraudsters. You tell them nothing, complete stonewall. Anything you say about why they were flagged will assist them in not getting flagged next time, so you tell them nothing. Some non-zero percent of time you will flag the wrong person and start a social media shit storm but that's just the cost of doing business.



That seems stupid- if they really thought the person was a fraudsters, Apple could ask for more information to investigate, they could get additional contact and/or identity information from the suspected fraudsters, and after investigating, if it turned out it was indeed fraud, they would have more data to report to authorities and make it easier to stop the fraud. But instead, Apple takes the lazy approach.


They do not want to investigate. They do not care about pursuing matters with the authorities (unless there is major carnage). They just want to keep involvement low, close the case as quick as possible and move on. Fraud mitigation is a cost center.


Yes, customer service is a cost center- and cutting corners on the said customer service is exactly what previous commenters were complaining about- app store developers pay Apple n extraordinary amount of money, they should get better customer service in return.


I think maybe you're operating under a wrong idea here. iOS developers are not customers. They are not treated as customers nor considered as customers.

There really is no analogue to the relationship Apple has with iOS developers except perhaps, "Extremely bad contracting relationship." Apple has a lock on the perception that you need to publish on their platform to be serious about mobile dev. As such, they don't need to treat developers well unless there are very large corporate relationships to maintain (and while I assure you such things are in play, sadly I'd be in very big trouble for getting into specifics on any of them).

Apple's model is to convince developers that they're obligated to prop Apple's platform. It is not the stunning core iOS experience that drives people to the platform, nor the beautiful default app toolkit. It's the sweat and prowess of its developer community, and yet the power of the relationship is completely inverted.

While Google can be a faceless cancelmachine, my experience shipping a few apps now is that Google is actually really responsive once you get to the stage where you have a direct rep. Getting Apple to respond to my needs historically has been Game of Thrones level politics and a function of how connected our startup funding network was.


This is an excellent reason for developing on an open platform, such as web.


Yes, perhaps 'partner' would be a better term... but I am not operating under the wrong idea... I am fully aware of Apples abusive relationship with developers, and that is why I have stayed away from their platform.


iOS developers are not customers.

$100/year says you're wrong.


I certainly hope people are moving off that abusive platform. But that doesn't make the relationship a customer relationship.


If I pay you money, I'm your customer. It really is that simple.


So I'm a customer of the DPT when I get a parking ticket?


Sigh. Let's try to confine the discussion to voluntary business relationships, shall we?


Sigh, let's remind ourselves that businesses misrepresenting themselses do not deserve special air cover. I'm not sure what you're hoping to gain by pretending this is a customer relationship and you can somehow coerce Apple by pretending you could get money back from them.

Any developer who thinks they are a "customer" in any meaningful sense of the word needs to re-read their click-thru contract with Apple. The concept of "customer" is distorted beyond belief here.


The lazy approach is probably way cheaper. Unless the social media shit storm is too big in which case they can correct after the fact.

Not saying it is ok to do it. Just that business will always pick the cheapest option they can get away with - that is, that does not affect the bottom line.


> That isn't how you deal with fraudsters. You tell them nothing, complete stonewall.

And you deal with murderers by putting them in prison, which is equally irrelevant because the person in question is neither.


It would be terrible if his source code or build system/process was carefully subverted by an attacker. With Apple stonewalling him he'd never know.




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

Search: