Live data from Hacker News

Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

google.com

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#51
post #26
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only allowing the owner to share an album is a false sense of security. If someone can see your album, they could just as easily download the photos and make them public. Instead of disallowing it outright, I'd rather they make it clear that you're sharing content with a wider audience. One solution would be to require that the owner approves the share, similar to how tagging is handled.

That's good idea. But it still wouldn't solve the issue of people downloading the photos and making them public.

That problem is inherent with posting something online. The best any service can do is make it difficult for someone to accidentally violate their friends' privacy.

This, in my opinion, is where Google+ is failing: sharing makes it very easy to make private posts visible to an audience larger than the author intended.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#52
post #40
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My expectation would be that the specific photos I tag Person A in are automatically visible to Person A. I think this is reasonable, and other concerns come up if a person is unable to see which photos they are tagged in. Making the entire album visible to Person A, I think, is not as reasonable.

Actually, the album is very important too. The album as a whole makes a story and by tagging photos you can make up actors of that story. For example, what about if album is "actors of porn movie X" or something like (the title of album could be more innocent) and one of photos in that album has you tagged? Regarding sharing, why would you want to tag somebody with his/her public profile without even telling him/her…

I went to see a live act on the night of my drunken party. I liked the singer's music and want to remember who they are later. I really don't think the singer needs to have access to my photo album from that night.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#53
post #39

This seems 100% reasonable to me. If somebody tags me I want to see that photo - and the entire album (since context is also important). I don't want that somebody starts taging me on some photos and then sharing these photos with others without me having chance to untag myself.

Before people start forgetting real-world context here:

In the physical world, people can and do take photos with you in it. They then get these developed, and may put them in an album with the people identified.

You would have absolutely no access to this photo unless they choose to share this with you, however that may be. They can also choose to share it with their friends, possibly even form a presentation with it to a certain slice of the public, and you still have no control over this, or even access to it.

This automatic re-sharing is quite the opposite, and I suspect Google did not fully follow the logical consequences through, or purposely chose to subvert the current physical-world situation. I don't like it, I'd rather have new-to-digital features following known physical traditions until there is ample evidence that it may be a good thing to change it.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#56
post #39

This seems 100% reasonable to me. If somebody tags me I want to see that photo - and the entire album (since context is also important). I don't want that somebody starts taging me on some photos and then sharing these photos with others without me having chance to untag myself.

Then I suggest you become a recluse because what you want just does not happen in the real world.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#57
I paid $32.68 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff, GrabCent.com

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#58
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you tagged an embarrassing photo of me... This happened to me 3 HOURS after joining facebook, and was not even ill-intentioned. (ah, young people!) edit: I marked tagged photos as private for a year till that photo was untagged. The photo is still there. :(

This may not have always been the case, but you can untag yourself and once you do that no one else is allowed to retag you.

I saw the untag feature, but it shouldn't be my job to monitor facebook 24x7 to untag embarrassing photos.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#59
post #53
post #39

This seems 100% reasonable to me. If somebody tags me I want to see that photo - and the entire album (since context is also important). I don't want that somebody starts taging me on some photos and then sharing these photos with others without me having chance to untag myself.

Before people start forgetting real-world context here: In the physical world, people can and do take photos with you in it. They then get these developed, and may put them in an album with the people identified. You would have absolutely no access to this photo unless they choose to share this with you, however that may be. They can also choose to share it with their friends, possibly even form a presentation with i…

The equivalent to your analogy is the "My Pictures" folder we all have on our private computers. Google is not this. They are a giant corporation letting you store your photos with them for free and they have documented that tagging is sharing.

Re: Google Plus: Tagging automatically shares private photos

#60
post #42

facebook is the sameway...no one is questioning that

Well judging by governments getting involved around the world I would say there has been sufficient questioning of the handling of privacy.

I think a lot of people where really hoping (myself included) that Google+ was going to give us the tool we wanted for social communication. But tis just another Facebook, with all the privacy concerns, and restrictions of freedom included. Everything that makes Facebook 'evil' is now part of Google.

Oddly enough a lot of musician and writer friends use pseudonyms, myself included ... or even plain nick names for that matter.

Facebook doesn't seem to ban those people as long as they have 'real activity'. So I could argue that Google is in fact on a worse 'evil' footing than Facebook right now.

After I read through the Google "what is Google+ really for" powerpoint I closed my account. It became obvious to me it was a lock-in attempt, and then went as far as saying the main 'target' of Google+ was Microsoft and Apple (because desktop apps where seeing a resurgence eroding Google business ambitious).

In my personal opinion Google+ is a very sinister piece of work which should be avoided at all costs. Because I know exactly how I would abuse it, and it appears already that Google is thinking along similar lines to me.

Post reply on HN