I certainly can’t disagree with you there; this just struck me as a situation where ignoring the ‘eh, sending mommy away to work as a nanny or having daddy slaving in Dhubai is so developing world; why bother supporting that use case?’ logic runs into a major American counterexample; and one that is reasonably well placed in terms of getting lip service; and also spends a fair amount of money.
It’s not news that people writing licensing agreements don’t care very much about those too poor to be their customers; so I was unsurprised that “Families where one or more members works overseas as a construction or domestic laborer” was relegated to ‘edge case’; but(in architectural terms) that is pretty much identical to ‘military family with deployed member’(ie. ‘legally recognized family group with one member residing outside of home nation state for work reasons’), which is a less easily dismissed demographic; and it is also quite similar to various(much less common; but often rather well heeled and capable of making their voices heard) jet-setting-expat family arrangements.
I’m not expecting Google to care because Support Our Troops™; but because the mechanisms you’d need to support the ‘family with overseas breadwinner’ case(while most commonly associated with foreign poors of limited interest); also covers the(rather large) US military population and their families; as well as various other international-traveler-on-business groups that Google has much more obvious monetary incentives to cater to.
Someone thought it would be a good idea for parents and kids to share content?
Saw that picture on Clickhole this morning.
Well, I don’t see a uniformed representative of the most influential local religion(indeed, no hats at all, funny or otherwise) there to provide ‘moral’ sanction for the operation. Other than that, looks pretty much exactly like most of history’s decisions-about-teh-womens working groups.
Recirculated off Facebook to the BBS. I’d love to criticize your use of a clickbait factory, but then… I just admitted to using Facebook, so…
This reminds me if when I was training sales support people in India, and we had to explain what did and didn’t count as a “family plan”.
All the trainees were completely confused by what counted and what didn’t, and could easily come up with several ways to abuse the discount offer while including only actual relatives. “But if the wife has a brother…” was how one started – basically they figured out how to daisy chain the offer so going by the rules it never hit the maximum, yet loads more people than intended got the deal.
Eventually we figured out what the client really meant and agreed to stick to that, but I wish the people who had come up with the rules could have heard them.
IMHO, basing anything on “family” is difficult and antiquated. The “five friends” deals some phone plans offer are much more sensible. Less to verify, fewer hard feelings.
In the sense that the one with the credit card needs to be able to buy kiddie cartoons, yes. In other senses; Not So Much(and, actually, that’s probably the hilarious and/or horrific other half of the difficulty with the ‘authorized domain’: it has long been recognized that things like ‘incognito mod’ are important for, um, buying birthday gifts for family; and other legitimate activity you might wish to conceal from members of the household; and creating yet another ‘sharing’ mechanism means creating yet another ‘potential for oversharing’ mechanism.)
It wouldn’t surprise me if this problem actually gets some attention, since anyone with an interest in selling you stuff will fairly easily recognize that some stuff isn’t going to get purchased if it isn’t available in inconspicuous packaging and without immediately showing up on your ‘family library’ on every streaming device in the house; so unless they want to give up their porn, B-movie guilty pleasure, etc. sales, they’ll need to figure out how to allow people to keep certain items out of the ‘authorized domain’ without being visible about concealing them(the old ‘you can’t just refuse to friend your mom on Facebook; because if you do she’ll lean on you’ problem); and do so simply enough that embarrassing errors aren’t a constant, harrowing, presence in the back of shoppers’ minds.
I’m not criticizing. I definitely saw it on Facebook too.
Sorry Sharon, I’m not part of your family - I’m in Grandma and Grandpa Murphy’s family. I love you, but they have the entire Red Hot Chili Peppers discography.
Does Clickhole get points for being an ironic, self-aware, clickbait factory that, among other things, deals in clickbait that mocks clickbait?
I don’t understand. Why not just allow a family to describe itself and build a small group of users who link their emails together which are then associated with devices?
yes, you may use this.
Bad things happen when programmers decide things. And I’m a programmer.
I didn’t think you were. Just comparing notes.
Programmers should not be allowed to decide anything. Sorry, they write code, most of the ones I’ve worked with are pretty clueless when it comes to human interaction.
Favourite illustration of irony, wrongheadedness, bizarro-world?
If there are more than three kids, they start killing off the parents: