This is exceessively verbose, repetitive and ai-written (translated?). I got lost half-way through because it keeps going on random, barely-related tangents.
What do I care about your problems with Anthropic? It's not even a good comparison because apparently the bank did everything.
What does it matter who owns how many shares of Google in Poland, or who used to be in charge of it? What does it matter that she apparently is in the "Forbes 50 after 50 list"??
Why randomly insult Ireland? "(...) and the Irish company replies at an Irish company’s pace, if at all." As if going at a snail's pace was a problem of being Irish, and not a global conglomerate.
Why describe in intricate detail how European laws are (going to be) implemented in Poland? And how the President can (and did) veto their implementation??
Having skimmed the last half of the post, I ultimately see this as fundamentally righteous, but also obsessive and borderline autistic crusade against big corpo.
Besides, sending 100 mails in four minutes is extreme. 99 media addresses? I don't think I could even find that many media organizations that care about someone getting their Google account blocked!
This is not the first time someone has experienced this and written or generated an article on the Internet which made front-page HN. Nor is it the one hundred thousandth time this someone has experienced this and not written or generated an article, or had the article not reach front-page HN.
At least this person is suing Google for it. Under EU law, they might actually win.
But why is the article AI-written? That is not helping your case.
Your media literacy training can start with skimming headings. When every heading sounds like Buzzfeed clickbait, emphasizing and contrasting numbers with a sort of faux-punchiness to them, or overusing "the" to make things sound more definitive than they actually are, or... on and on, it really couldn't be more obvious.
> Six emails, one button
> The hotline sends you to the office. The office sends you to the hotline.
> The bank could. Google couldn't.
> Three companies at one address
> A company wih 105 million in capital, five employees and zero website
> The address Google did not show its customers for two and a half years
> People who left, and people who came
> Germany: the court that ordered the data to be returned
> Ireland: where the other party to the agreement lives
> What disappears with the inbox
Or the "in brief" at the top, which is spamming numbers as though they add dramatic tension. Or, just like, every. fucking. sentence. You know, years of reading this shit can't be distilled into a comment. Have you not been reading articles for the last three years? LLMs have very distinct voices.
Jesus fuck, would you get off your high horse already? This is every investigative article heading since before Dario or Sam even finished high school.
Seeing LLMs everywhere is another kind of AI psychosis.
It doesn't read as AI generated at all, it's got distinct Polish style. It could have been AI-reviewed, judging by the ugly Oxford commas.
Moral of the story is not simply "don't use free accounts". His account was not free, he had a paid Google Workspace. The moral of the story Google and other big American corporations are absolutely unaccountable in Europe. We should stop using their services and switch to our European sovereign service providers. Big American corporations can block even business accounts as they please and ignore European laws and courts.
So the author actually sent more than 100 automated emails about how Anthropic wronged him to some people and that’s actually spam. He already disputed the payments for Anthropic with his bank and got the money, so I have no idea why he spammed other people with his problems.
Also, he is adamant that re-instating his gmail account is like his birth right and at the same time has a lot of examples of how different countries fined Google/Alphabet and saying it’s evil, which is irrelevant to his spamming issue.
> On September 1, 2026, between 15:49 and 15:53, I sent six messages from my private Gmail account to a total of 107 different addresses: 99 media addresses, four public authorities, two Anthropic addresses, and two private addresses. They were complaints about Anthropic, the maker of the Claude assistant and Claude Code tool, which had disabled services I paid for and answered my complaints with a bot.
... Eeeeeesh. 99 media addresses, and I guarantee at least several of them probably smacked the "report spam" button to the massive email they've been CC'd on.
Spamming is defined as sending a single message indiscriminately to a bunch of recipients. Old mate sent a single message indiscriminately to a bunch of media companies hoping to get publicity for his personal cause. Yeah, that's textbook spam.
> Pushing out tens of millions emails a day for years - no, that's creative.
No clue what kind of whataboutism you're trying to bring into the conversation here but it's irrelevant.
This is a short thesis saying you shouldn't use a personal email account for marketing, ad, or press campaigns. Doing so places that personal email account at risk of closure.
As far as I remember Google will ban all accounts associated with the one their "AI" finds "reason" to ban. So if you make a business account besides your personal, both will be banned.
> The decision to close the account is made by the system, not the human
Someone from Apple here once told that they close millions of accounts daily. How many accounts does Google close? It's unfeasible to expect any company to do a human review at this scale.
I'm not saying Google doesn't have too much power, but I'm also not saying it isn't hilarious to see someone let an OpenClaw instance go wild on their main e-mail account and rightfully get banned for spam.
This is exceessively verbose, repetitive and ai-written (translated?). I got lost half-way through because it keeps going on random, barely-related tangents.
What do I care about your problems with Anthropic? It's not even a good comparison because apparently the bank did everything.
What does it matter who owns how many shares of Google in Poland, or who used to be in charge of it? What does it matter that she apparently is in the "Forbes 50 after 50 list"??
Why randomly insult Ireland? "(...) and the Irish company replies at an Irish company’s pace, if at all." As if going at a snail's pace was a problem of being Irish, and not a global conglomerate.
Why describe in intricate detail how European laws are (going to be) implemented in Poland? And how the President can (and did) veto their implementation??
Having skimmed the last half of the post, I ultimately see this as fundamentally righteous, but also obsessive and borderline autistic crusade against big corpo.
Besides, sending 100 mails in four minutes is extreme. 99 media addresses? I don't think I could even find that many media organizations that care about someone getting their Google account blocked!
This is not the first time someone has experienced this and written or generated an article on the Internet which made front-page HN. Nor is it the one hundred thousandth time this someone has experienced this and not written or generated an article, or had the article not reach front-page HN.
At least this person is suing Google for it. Under EU law, they might actually win.
But why is the article AI-written? That is not helping your case.
I'd say it's totally immaterial how it was written
> why is the article AI-written?
Can you share what the tells are?
I am not seeing obvious tells. And I see multiple tells that clearly are NOT AI, like imperfect sentence structure.
It seems information dense, and doesn't seem like an obviously shit article?
If you're going to complain, can you explain what you're complaining about?
It's pretty blatant, but just have a glance at the subheadings to remove any doubt.
Examples?
I just gave them to you. I'm not gonna copy paste shit you can easily find yourself on the page, bud.
At a certain point you need to develop your own media literacy. The article is literally dripping with Claudisms in every line.
Examples?
Your media literacy training can start with skimming headings. When every heading sounds like Buzzfeed clickbait, emphasizing and contrasting numbers with a sort of faux-punchiness to them, or overusing "the" to make things sound more definitive than they actually are, or... on and on, it really couldn't be more obvious.
> Six emails, one button
> The hotline sends you to the office. The office sends you to the hotline.
> The bank could. Google couldn't.
> Three companies at one address
> A company wih 105 million in capital, five employees and zero website
> The address Google did not show its customers for two and a half years
> People who left, and people who came
> Germany: the court that ordered the data to be returned
> Ireland: where the other party to the agreement lives
> What disappears with the inbox
Or the "in brief" at the top, which is spamming numbers as though they add dramatic tension. Or, just like, every. fucking. sentence. You know, years of reading this shit can't be distilled into a comment. Have you not been reading articles for the last three years? LLMs have very distinct voices.
Jesus fuck, would you get off your high horse already? This is every investigative article heading since before Dario or Sam even finished high school.
Seeing LLMs everywhere is another kind of AI psychosis.
Probably not a native speaker.
It doesn't read as AI generated at all, it's got distinct Polish style. It could have been AI-reviewed, judging by the ugly Oxford commas.
Moral of the story is not simply "don't use free accounts". His account was not free, he had a paid Google Workspace. The moral of the story Google and other big American corporations are absolutely unaccountable in Europe. We should stop using their services and switch to our European sovereign service providers. Big American corporations can block even business accounts as they please and ignore European laws and courts.
> Under EU law, they might actually win.
So what? They will ignore the decision of the court, just like the author explains they did.
So the author actually sent more than 100 automated emails about how Anthropic wronged him to some people and that’s actually spam. He already disputed the payments for Anthropic with his bank and got the money, so I have no idea why he spammed other people with his problems.
Also, he is adamant that re-instating his gmail account is like his birth right and at the same time has a lot of examples of how different countries fined Google/Alphabet and saying it’s evil, which is irrelevant to his spamming issue.
>That day I sent six complaints about Anthropic, the maker of Claude, to 107 recipients.
So a spammer spammed and got his just deserts. Good.
> On September 1, 2026, between 15:49 and 15:53, I sent six messages from my private Gmail account to a total of 107 different addresses: 99 media addresses, four public authorities, two Anthropic addresses, and two private addresses. They were complaints about Anthropic, the maker of the Claude assistant and Claude Code tool, which had disabled services I paid for and answered my complaints with a bot.
... Eeeeeesh. 99 media addresses, and I guarantee at least several of them probably smacked the "report spam" button to the massive email they've been CC'd on.
Legit I laughed so hard when I got to that point and closed the tab.
100 emails to every 'media company' you can think of is textbook spam. No shit your account got banned, lol.
> 100 emails to every 'media company' you can think of is textbook spam
Really.
Pushing out tens of millions emails a day for years - no, that's creative.
Sending one email to a hundred media companies - a textbook spam.
Spamming is defined as sending a single message indiscriminately to a bunch of recipients. Old mate sent a single message indiscriminately to a bunch of media companies hoping to get publicity for his personal cause. Yeah, that's textbook spam.
> Pushing out tens of millions emails a day for years - no, that's creative.
No clue what kind of whataboutism you're trying to bring into the conversation here but it's irrelevant.
This is a short thesis saying you shouldn't use a personal email account for marketing, ad, or press campaigns. Doing so places that personal email account at risk of closure.
As far as I remember Google will ban all accounts associated with the one their "AI" finds "reason" to ban. So if you make a business account besides your personal, both will be banned.
> The decision to close the account is made by the system, not the human
Someone from Apple here once told that they close millions of accounts daily. How many accounts does Google close? It's unfeasible to expect any company to do a human review at this scale.
Not that I like it, but that's the way it is.
> It's unfeasible to expect any company to do a human review at this scale.
Oh it absolutely is. Yes it would cost money, as do other tasks a company has at hands.
I'm not saying Google doesn't have too much power, but I'm also not saying it isn't hilarious to see someone let an OpenClaw instance go wild on their main e-mail account and rightfully get banned for spam.