Through LinkedIn API, if I query for network updates, generally I see all the update types - CONN, VIRL, CMPY, etc.
http://developer.linkedin.com/documents/network-update-types
However, only for certain users, CONN updates dont show up. For them I see other update types, just the connections oens are not available.
Do we know why? What are we missing? Or are those few users doing something specific with their permissions. We tried a few combinations, but still cannot figure it out.
Thanks,
Kushal.
Related
We are using Firebase/Google analytics for our Android and iOS app. Everything seemed to be sending data correctly and we were able to view the data in Big Query etc. However we started to notice that some data seemed to be getting lost.
We detected an odd situation where some users' analytics data stopped showing on Firebase/Google Analytics/Big Query, despite having previously received data from that user in the past. The data seems to just stop at a random point in time, for random users.
in_app_purchase events from those players were still appearing in the data on dates where they didn't have any other events. We checked our backend service (gamesparks) for their account and could see that they were active players who had been using the app very recently. That is, after their last event was appearing in Big Query.
After investigating some more and started finding other users who had the same issue. They would be sending data without issue and then all of a sudden we would receive nothing from them, except from in_app_purchase events/notification events etc which are sent via a seperate service (app store etc) rather than the client.
After scouring our implementation and going over it line by line comparing to the samples/documentation we couldn't really see any issues, and even the automatic events (session_start etc) stop appearing. We made sure we were using the latest versions of the firebase SDKs etc in the hope it would fix it but it made no difference.
One peculiar thing is that when we find a in_app_purchase event from one of these 'broken' players, things like the user properties and default parameters for that player have changed from when they stopped sending data, so it seems like the lost data is somewhere but not being logged anywhere.
I was wondering if it was possible for specific users to stop their app sending any analytics data to Firebase via a device/google account setting?
While looking into the documentation we noticed that if Google Play Services is installed on the device, data is sent via that, rather than via the client/firebase sdk itself. Is there any known issue with players changing their Google Play Services settings that could cause something like this?
Wondered if this was a known issue but please let me know what other information you might need.
EDIT: I also wanted to mention that although we can't be 100% certain, we believe this is only happening to our Android users. We haven't found any iOS users that have the same issue.
Thanks,
Matt
Is this a common/reasonable Use case?
An app allows a user to save favorites locally so that the user doesn't need to signup.
Then the user afterwards desires to share their favorites.
Therefore favorites data needs to be synced from local to remote. The usual local storage for flutter is sqflite, and firebase/store is the remote. However, this seems cumbersome, as sql to nosql conversion is necessary.
I thought that this would be a general issue for UX etc, but I can't find any discussion of this issue? Maybe forcing the user to create an account is the most general solution?
It's a common understanding that if you don't have user account then you can't have any user data associated with your name. You don't have to force the user to have an account or lock them out.
When they favourite something just show a dialog telling them "If you don't have an account your favourites are stored on the device only. If you want your favourites to be available everywhere please create an account" then show options for "Create account" or "No, Thanks"
Create account: Goes to account creation page
No, Thanks: Adds the device to the favourites list and lets the user continue to do what your app does.
There's no problem to solve here from what I'm seeing. If you don't have an account you don't get account functionality. If you track users without them entering anything it's also a little bit illegal and creepy so no need to push the limits on how you can track the same user.
Another way to think of it is to make signup so easy they don't mind and also guarantee that it's worth it. Won't be used for spam or information selling. Take what's app as an example, even though you need to mobile number to send the messages, it's just used as a unique identifier and has nothing to do with the device's number.
Ask for their phone number or email or just any email, you'll most likely get fake info.
And what does your analytics say? Are you getting requests from users saying they lost all their information on a different device? How many people are using your favourite functionality?
I may have come to the party a little late here but here's my 2 cents worth.
The Sql to NoSql conversion is not cumbersome. In fact, there is a reasonable use case for this. I have the same requirement for an app that I am about to build.
Anyway, to store data in RDMDB or NoSQLDB you will need a data model to ensure consistency in your app. If the user has been using the app offline, and they later choose to go online, you can allow them to create the Remote Account, then check if they have local favorites. If they do, you will HAVE to ask them if they'd like to import them into the remote storage. If they choose to do so, you will then have to read their favorites from the local storage and store them in a List<Model> then map() that back to the online storage.
NoSqlDB can accept the json type data, so your model should include the conversion fromMap() and toJson() for this purpose (and others).
When I have come around to doing this, I will share my code (if I remember to come back here).
I work for an advertising agency working with several clients who we are building and managing wordpress websites for. One issue that arises every time with a new install, is the issue with emails not sending/receiving. We usually solve this by installing an SMTP plugin and set it up using the clients Office 365 email account or whatever provider they have.
The problem is that this is a little time consuming, as well as some of our clients either don´t want to give away their account information/they don't know their account information/they change passwords and forms stop working.
We need a stable email solution that we can use on a wide spectrum of client pages, and that we hopefully don´t need to set up every time we make a new webpage. Does anyone have any solutions/suggestions for this?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Before I get into the recommendation, WordPress should use your servers default sendmail configuration so it’s possible something is misconfigured here as it should work out of the box.
But if you want something a little more bulletproof I recommend SendGrid.
One of the problems with all your sites using the same mail server is if one is blacklisted for something the others go down. With SendGrid, which is free for 10k send a month I think, you can issue an api key for each site and if one has an issue it you can easily identify it in SendGrid.
I have setup dozens of API Keys and the plug-in. It’s fast and simple and takes about 5 minutes in total. They have great delivery, detailed reports and are cheap even if you need a lot of sends.
You can Signup for an account and use the SendGrid plugin from the Wordpress repository.
I have upgraded a Firebase app to the new version, so I see my Firebase at console.firebase.google.com.
The console shows me a message Wow, you have a lot of users! Because you have over 500 users, they aren't automatically displayed. The only way to see any user details at all seems to be to search for a complete email address and that only works for users with a password.
I don't know how I came to have so many users, it's a development system and I am not aware of more than a dozen userIds. Regardless, I would like to delete them all.
I get the same message in a production system which also has less than 500 known users, so I must have some that are not real - I want to be able to view some details and delete them one by one.
The Docs don't provide a solution for either requirement. Any suggestions please?
This question is not related to ASP.NET specifically, but more web applications in general.
I am building a web application wherein I am registering a user. As of now I am taking in very basic credentials like First Name, Last Name, etc of the user. In this website I am giving some information for free for any user who has just registered so that the user finds my website authentic and that it is not a fake website. After that, to get more information, the user has to pay.
The information my site provides will get obsolete after sometime. So, when a new user registers, he/she will get the new information that gets updated; but the old users have to pay to get the same new information.
My problem here is once the information gets obsolete the same person can re-register with a different set of credentials and get the new information. I want to avoid this from happening.
So my question here is this: what information should I request from the user, or extract from the user, to check that the same user is not re-registering? Or any other way to make this possible.
I am thinking of getting the IP address of the machine from which the person is registering and use it to check. But the user can use a different machine to re-register.
I am completely lost here and not getting the solution. I even checked on the Internet but could not find an answer.
Please let me know if you need any further information from my side.
You will not find a technical way to prevent users from registering multiple times. They can simply use another device, IP, another email account and different credentials.
What you can do is asking them to send you hard to fake "offline" information, like a credit card number or a photo of the ID. Some users may still be able to register multiple times this way, but probably not indefinitly. You will however lose many possible clients this way who are unwilling to provide such information for a test account, so this is likely not the solution you want.
My advice would be one of the following two:
Limit the information/service you give out to free users, so that even if they register again they will gain something when they pay.
Try to bind them to their account in a way where they would lose something if they threw it away. This may for example be providing user rewards for activity (real or virtual) or increasing their experience based on their history. Take SO for example: If you registered again, you would lose all your reputation. The users will think twice if this is worth the new content.
After reading all of the above, i think a good solution could be to let the user identify himself through facebook or linkedin. Few people will have a second account.
I think you cannot put any users like that because every thing can be duplicate
There are some ways for which the user must have payment mode or identity details like passport or it is windows application you can have finger scanner it will be definitely Unique..
You can do this (with limitations) with the use of cookies. Setting a cookie on the users device will allow you to determine who the visitor is and that they have already registered.
The limitations are that cookies can be deleted or blocked and are only valid for that specific user agent - the user could use a different device or a different browser on the same device. A lot of people don't really know about cookies though and how to delete them.
By tying this technique with a requirement to provide a valid email address you can make it a hassle for somebody to register more than once as they will have to create a new email account and then delete their cookies.
Whether this will stop enough people depends on your site and your requirements - if you're giving money away then this technique is not nearly good enough. If you just want to discourage the practice of multiple accounts it may be enough.
Your only way out is to have SOMETHING the existing user gets as a "gift?" or added value to maintain just one account. If you can identify items of value to your subscribers and offer to "give" it to them provided their account "attains" one or more status, then you'll get some control. Take stackoverflow.com for example, I don't need a second account.
Identifying by facebook or linkedin is a good option, but if you are giving such services. which are very beneficial for the users, so they dont mind on creating multiple accounts on even facebook or linked in.
So what i think is to set some reward type stuff with each user, and increase the services as they get increment in rewards.once they are good in rewards and are capable to use multiple services, this increases the probability that they will not create another account.