> After reading it a third time, I realize I guess it's just an open-source version of Mint?
Well, not a great sigh for us, but at least… you guessed right!
> But the author provides zero evidence that Google bans ads for "privacy-first services". It was probably classified as a crypto scam or similar.
I made this conclusion based on the information provided by my friends working in Google and Microsoft. Again, there's no way I can reliably say the _real_ reason because all Google said was "Unacceptable Business Practice" linking to this page. (https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6020955?hl=en#36...)
That's actually more or less the point of the article: you get banned for life for no apparent reason. Is that how it's supposed to be?
> it looks like a scam
What is it that you don't like about the design? I just tried not to follow the common guidelines for the design and make the design more… developer friendly?
> After reading it a third time, I realize I guess it's just an open-source version of Mint?
Well, not a great sigh for us, but at least… you guessed right!
> But the author provides zero evidence that Google bans ads for "privacy-first services". It was probably classified as a crypto scam or similar.
I made this conclusion based on the information provided by my friends working in Google and Microsoft. Again, there's no way I can reliably say the _real_ reason because all Google said was "Unacceptable Business Practice" linking to this page. (https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6020955?hl=en#36...)
That's actually more or less the point of the article: you get banned for life for no apparent reason. Is that how it's supposed to be?
> it looks like a scam
What is it that you don't like about the design? I just tried not to follow the common guidelines for the design and make the design more… developer friendly?