Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content” • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#721

Post by bamboozled » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

contravariant wrote: post #441

crazygringo wrote: post #388

I see a lot of comments misinterpreting this. First, it's not about private files, it's about distributing content. Google isn't spying on your private files, but does scan them when you share them publicly. E.g. keep all the pirated movies you want on your Drive, and even give private access to friends, but the moment you make them publicly viewable Google scans them and limits access accordingly. So no, this isn't…

There's something fundamentally flawed about the idea that censorship in the name of preventing misinformation is protecting the foundation of democracy. You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. I should at this point note that Google does…

This is absolutely true.

If I can't explore new ideas, evaluate information and make up my own mind, no matter how much bullshit exists, I'm not living in a democratic free society anymore. I'm living in a technological dystopia, and authoritarian state.

I'm afraid, skepticism is part of a healthy democracy...no matter how much the government want me to get a jab.

When did Google feel the need to be the world police?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#722

Post by throwaway83058 » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

driverdan wrote: post #469

crazygringo wrote: post #388

I see a lot of comments misinterpreting this. First, it's not about private files, it's about distributing content. Google isn't spying on your private files, but does scan them when you share them publicly. E.g. keep all the pirated movies you want on your Drive, and even give private access to friends, but the moment you make them publicly viewable Google scans them and limits access accordingly. So no, this isn't…

> Google isn't spying on your private files This is false. All of the major services that host images scan them for child porn, regardless if they're private or shared. I don't know how they're going to apply these rules and, unless you work there and are involved in this, neither do you.

I work at Google. I’m not involved with this change specifically, but suffice it to say there is far more advanced processing than simple hash checks for CSAM being run on every file uploaded to Drive. I would be surprised if all files weren’t subject to these checks, but whether or not Google will take action on them is another matter.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#723

Post by shrimpx » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 5:52 AM UTC

logicchains wrote: post #685

crazygringo wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's something fundamentally flawed There isn't really. You're adopting, I assume, J.S. Mill's view, that the cure for bad speech is more speech, which he famously published in 1859. However, since then it's been widely accepted that when speech reaches a certain level of harm then the greater good is to prevent/punish it. You can't incite violence under the guise of free speech. You can't advertise that somethi…

>However, since then it's been widely accepted It's not widely accepted at all, except maybe in the small circle of Silicon Valley elites whose ideas align with yours politically.

I don’t know about you, but any social group I’ve been part of has had its boundaries beyond which some speech and behavior becomes unacceptable and has consequences. What kind of social groups are you part of where all speech, including lies, insults, smearing, is accepted?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#724

Post by shrimpx » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 5:55 AM UTC

imwillofficial wrote: post #712

crazygringo wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's something fundamentally flawed There isn't really. You're adopting, I assume, J.S. Mill's view, that the cure for bad speech is more speech, which he famously published in 1859. However, since then it's been widely accepted that when speech reaches a certain level of harm then the greater good is to prevent/punish it. You can't incite violence under the guise of free speech. You can't advertise that somethi…

> u can't incite violence under the guise of free speech. No, you can’t incite violence with speech. Everyone is responsible for the actions they take, even if misinformed.

That’s not a reasonable position. In the limit that implies that you treat everyone as the enemy. Isolate in your own protected world, because you might get duped or harmed any minute now. That to me is a shitty world I don’t want to live in. I’d rather reasonably trust people and have a common baseline and shared narrative.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#725

Post by wutbrodo » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 5:59 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #388

I see a lot of comments misinterpreting this. First, it's not about private files, it's about distributing content. Google isn't spying on your private files, but does scan them when you share them publicly. E.g. keep all the pirated movies you want on your Drive, and even give private access to friends, but the moment you make them publicly viewable Google scans them and limits access accordingly. So no, this isn't…

> All our legal protections ultimately depend on a democratic foundation -- undo that with misinformation and you don't have anything anymore. Similarly, your rights don't matter much if you're dead.

This is an insane conclusion to draw, because it blithely ignores that it positions Google as an oracle of what's threatening to democracy and what isn't.

The examples in the current policy are fairly narrow, but this is a categorical line being crossed (for better or worse). Those who are concerned by the increasing encroachment of effective utilities on what can be communicated need to speak up when clear lines are crossed, because it's the only way to avoid frog-boiling.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#726

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:00 AM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#727

Post by acituan » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:00 AM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #571

contravariant wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's something fundamentally flawed about the idea that censorship in the name of preventing misinformation is protecting the foundation of democracy. You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. I should at this point note that Google does…

The bigger problem that I have with the idea that misinformation kills democracy is that it seems to suggest that misinformation is some new phenomenon or that the average person has been well informed throughout the history of western democracy. Democracy thrived before the printing press. Democracy survived the invention of the printing press, which was mostly in the hands of magnates who could afford it. Democracy…

> suggest that misinformation is some new phenomenon

Misinformation in this shape and form is a new phenomenon. And it is not just the scale;

- the number of agents that push their version of misinformation is at least an order of magnitude higher than ever, depending on the particular topic. So-called culture wars have so many different sides.

- technology not only scales misinformation, but it also accelerates it. The objective function of "increased engagement" meshes very well. Hard to grok, full fidelity facts don't get shared or recommended as much as rage-baiting or bias-confirming material.

- technology can on-the-fly piece together material to conform to whatever bullshit you want to hear, I want to hear or the other guy wants to hear. As it is optimized to increase engagement, it can efficiently generate personalized micro-narratives, which is ultimately a reflection of our personal biases.

The problems is it gets harder and harder for these narratives to converge. More on that below.

> If anything, what we're seeing with the internet is a more true democracy with a wider range of opinions, less controlled by small groups of plutocrats

As mentioned, original thoughts don't have the same propagation speed or reach as junk-infotainment, and you're just as subject to the narrative-shaping powers of those "plutocrats" as ever. They just blend in better.

But the larger issue is that you can't equivocate mere plurality with a functioning democracy. Ultimately there is a single reality, and even though we are in divergent positions due to having different entry points and framings, we should be - however little - converging in our narratives and understanding of that reality as time progresses.

But the opposite seems to be happening, we are getting dumber at scale, stuff makes less sense, institutional mistrust is at all-time-high. I am not putting this all on tech, but it certainly pours fuel on the fire of meaning-making crisis.

I wouldn't take it for granted that we could survive this without it creating a larger crisis first.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#728

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:01 AM UTC

SavageBeast wrote: post #133

This is like watching someone (tech companies) wrap a rope around his neck while standing on a ladder. HEY HOLD MY BEER! Its all fun and games when an administration "in charge" has your back. It's going to be 100% different the day that changes. It's almost like people forget the pendulum of leadership in the US has a well known tendency to swing. Don't get me wrong, in principal I can get behind the idea of this bu…

Give your allies only as much power over you as you would be comfortable with if they were your worst enemies.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#729

Post by zekrioca » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:02 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #388

I see a lot of comments misinterpreting this. First, it's not about private files, it's about distributing content. Google isn't spying on your private files, but does scan them when you share them publicly. E.g. keep all the pirated movies you want on your Drive, and even give private access to friends, but the moment you make them publicly viewable Google scans them and limits access accordingly. So no, this isn't…

Why do they scan it when made public? Why does it have to be pro-active and not reactive?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#730

Post by mjthompson » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:02 AM UTC

weare138 wrote: post #709

contravariant wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's something fundamentally flawed about the idea that censorship in the name of preventing misinformation is protecting the foundation of democracy. You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. I should at this point note that Google does…

>You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. Google is not the government. It's a private company owned by private citizens who also have the same constitutional rights. You're not being 'censored'. It's not a violation of your free speech. Y…

I'm not even close to convinced by your response. Relying on the public-private divide as the sole basis for your retort is weak. You also assert that the person is pushing a personal narrative, but I suggest you're doing the same.

There's an argument that private corporations that are involved in dissemination of information (search engines and social media) should respect principles of freedom of speech as a democratic principle, regardless of constitutional mandate.

Suppose the government outsources welfare eligibility decision-making to a private company. Does this mean traditional notions of fairness we would expect from such an decision-maker do not apply, because they are a private company?