As the person paying for a Netflix account used by my household, I don’t really care from a monetary standpoint.
However I don’t like technical barriers Netflix is erecting. Tracking IPs, Device-IDs and linking them to location info. I pay for the service and I’m not okay with these extensive measures.
I don't think Stripe holding money is the problem here. The problem to me seems that there is no support to be reached at Stripe to dispute their decision or get a human to answer. I agree that OP's business doesn't seem that healthy if $3000 are such a big problem, however that doesn't make Stripe's non-existing support any better.
I've dealt with Stripe support and it's been... fine? Good even? I can only assume that if they've gone radio silent there's a reason. I'm not convinced Stripe is acting in bad faith, as shitty as this is. (Unlike, say, PayPal, who is notorious for shit like this).
At least one instance I'm aware of has to do with anti-money laundering regulations, where it can be disallowed to communicate regarding a pending investigation, but obviously I can't speak to if that's happening here.
> I can only assume that if they've gone radio silent there's a reason
This is the fundamental mistake made when dealing with these corporations. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt, but beyond that, any customer service system that has a heavy bot presence and outright removes inconvenient (for them) points of contact should be assumed negligent and suspect by default.
I'd be very interested to know what your issue was that they helped with. I'm 0 for 3 (potentially 1 is fixed now, 1 fixed itself, and the last I gave up on). Unless your issue is trivial you will be thrown in limbo and go days/weeks without a reply.
I agree that is clearly for non-developers that are in the Adobe ecosystem, however to me it's still unclear why they decided on this system. I thought about simple landing pages as well, but they state this in the faqs:
"You can use Helix for small sites because it is very easy to get started, but it works best for large sites with many authors, frequent updates, and lots of traffic."
Which confuses me a bit about which kind of pages they intended to be created in Helix. They also talk about Stripe integration for e-commerce shops.
> but it works best for large sites with many authors, frequent updates, and lots of traffic.
I could see it being used for short-lived high traffic sites like festivals, concerts, movie landing pages and other typical agency-created sites. These might have multiple authors to public posts, FAQ items and some small e-commerce components.
So I spent a while on their page, https://www.hlx.live/business/project-plan seems to have the best explanation how Adobe thinks you should use their product. However I still don't really see the use case:
> Helix dynamically renders HTML via Markdown that is generated from the content source documents. Markdown provides an abstraction as well as filter for content created in the various different data sources and strips all the formatting that cannot easily be projected into HTML semantics. This means you don’t have to worry about authors picking the wrong font, size, or color, Helix will take care that your final site looks as the design specs say.
So it's just generating a markdown document from my Word document and dynamically renders that to HTML. It seems like a weird SSG that isn't static, relies on proprietary files stored in either Google Drive or SharePoint, and seems to be aimed at Content Creators that are not tech savy at all (why else would you prefer Word over md files?).
However all that is still very confusing and it looks a bit like the project changed direction during development (e.g. there's still mention of GitHub as file storage which has been discontinued in the faqs etc.) I still don't see who would use this for their site.
The hard part in maintaining a website by a team of non-geeks is not a Markdown renderer, but the fact that people have their own preferred tools and workflows, and aren't keen on learning yet another one. All the extra export/import/sync steps are a pain for them, and cause chaos when collaborating. You update the Markdown version, someone else changes the Word version instead, a third person hates Word, and someone else puts notes on GitHub, and now you need to train half a dozen people how to clone a repo and how to fix a detached head.
> So it's just generating a markdown document from my Word document and dynamically renders that to HTML.
Ages ago (probably more than 15 years or so) I generated HTML, even multi-page web sites from within Word itself, using VBA. It required some proficiency in VBA but Word already had a structure that you could translate with different classes of headings, font modifications, etc. - so it wasn't exactly "rocket science" either. I did the same in Excel, but here more focused on autogenerating pseudo "db-driven" sites than on prose.
Typically these would be "intranet" apps, but I believe some may have been exposed to the www. Being static sites, security was like any other pure HTML site.
> I still don't see who would use this for their site.
My customers were in marketing. They already used these Office tools and they found it a real advantage that they could just continue to use these tools.
This was before WP got to the dominant position (and level of user-friendlyness) it has today. It's still possible though.
I worked in a large tech Co that used AEM for building web pages. I think one landing page took months, at least not less than one. If a content team can launch some simpler pages using this on their own, we would have definitely bought and used this.
I have looked at the NetzDG reporting on YouTube and Twitter and while both of them require you to cite a specific law the content is in violation of, they both do not require any report to authorities. The NetzDG doesn't require involvement of authorities, it was especially designed with the goal of moving the work from the state to private companies.
The colouring in the „World Press Freedom Index“ graphics doesn‘t seem to make any sense. Countries with very different placements on the index have a similar shade of red and the only greenish looking country is Vietnam, placed 175/180.
