Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 464 posts

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#101

Post by Kim_Bruning »

ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #13

I experienced something similar building an internal tool on GSuite. I had a large file with sequences of 9 digit numbers specific to our use-case, all tied to names of people (employees). Whelp, at one point the tool I was working on stopped working, and it was flagged as apparently containing social security numbers (which I suppose matched the character length). Whelp, on the admin panel, you can get a report of t…

This is why running filters on automated data is never a good idea, and should never be accepted (at least for enterprise applications, but really for anything) .

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#102

Post by asdff »

xiphias2 wrote: post #44
gruez wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true to some extent, but in the file storage space it's not really applicable. There are hundreds of competitors, and I'm not even sure if any file storage providers got bought up by "megacorps".

Not really. I'm using all parts of Google suite together as they are well integrated with every device I have and eachother. I am using Adobe cloud for photos instead of Google photos for example, and even there I quite often feel the difference in integration with the Android operating system.

Adobe software is especially annoying. There are probably five or six adobe launch daemons running in the shadows on my Mac as we speak and it's unclear if when I want to uninstall that their uninstaller will actually purge them all (in my experience, no), or I'm going to have to write a script to collect anything with adobe in the name and rm -rf. Microsoft is bad with this too on Mac at least. I tried killing a microsoft autoupdate daemon and I ended up getting a system notification like three times a day about it until I relented and reinstalled it.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#103

Post by bxparks »

leokennis wrote: post #62

15 years ago the first word that came to mind when thinking of Google was “magic”. 10 years ago “useful”. These days it’s just “dread”.

Maybe not "dread", but distrust with a tinge of sadness. It is surprising to see how much their executives are willing to destroy Google's reputation, in search of.. I don't know.. their next bonus and promotion? Seven to eight years ago, I was using probably 30-40 Google products and services. I used to recommend Google products to my friends and family without reservation. But over time, I have whittled down my dependency to Google to maybe 7-9 products/services. With the killing of Legacy GSuite, I'll be migrating to FastMail or something similar, and I'll be down to only a handful of Google products in a few months. I never thought that I would stop using Google Search and Chrome, but DDG and Firefox have been perfectly fine for me for several years now.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#104

Post by matheweis »

notyourwork wrote: post #85
leokennis wrote: post #62

15 years ago the first word that came to mind when thinking of Google was “magic”. 10 years ago “useful”. These days it’s just “dread”.

I think dread is a bit over dramatic. I still find utility in Google Maps and GMail. Some products in the Google domain are heading that way but I don't dread Google I treat them as a business with respect to my coupling to them on a case by case basis. I used to be a Google first, now I am one to look at all options and decide if its worth coupling something else in my life to Google. In many cases its not worth it…

> I still find utility in Google Maps and GMail.

Give it time... There are a lot of people feeling that dread about “gmail” now. Have you seen the recent threads about GSuite Legacy? Small businesses and families suddenly need to cough up hundreds of dollars per year or figure out how to migrate away from a product that originally marketed itself as free forever.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#105

Post by vorpalhex »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #51
kbrannigan wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Load up on usb drives. I mean really when did we suddenly become dependent on cloud services? It's phenomenon that's less than 15 years old.

Won't help me when my computer starts refusing to read copyrighted files because it has decided its real masters are the copyright holders.

Buy hardware you can own. Stop buying Apple products.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#106

Post by foxfluff »

version_five wrote: post #96
matheusmoreira wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are also fabricated by huge corporations. No guarantee they won't be compromised by industry or government interests.

It does seem to some extend the higher the level of abstraction, the more potential for inappropriate controls or restrictions. More restrictions exist in apps vs OS vs cpu, or in cloud services like gdrive vs an EBS volume on AWS. So FPGAs are at least a step closer to free (or harder to secure). Even if they are under control of the manufacturer, there is a lot more flexibility and less potential for "oversight" at…

Depending on what your performance target is, you might do without adapters. Low speed USB can be bitbanged even with 8-bit attiny. RP2040 with PIO can run DVI, 720p@30Hz (though you do need to overclock the chip heavily). I don't know how to implement Ethernet with digital logic (it uses pulse amplitude modulation) but bandwidth-wise it's not too challenging. Gigabit signals to PHY are 125MHz using RGMII. I think 100Mbit Ethernet would use 25MHz but I'm not actually sure. All doable using commodity microcontrollers without an FPGA.

I could see a long road to a dystopia where these legacy protocols are deprecated and they push out devices that only speak new protocols that won't let unapproved devices talk.. but I'm not that pessimistic. I can't see the copyright mafia chasing things down so far, and they'd rail up against all the industrial users.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#107

Post by IshKebab »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #69
miohtama wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There probably was risk discussion involved in some point of feature implementation. Lawyers got involved and the discussion likely went like this 1) DMCA Safe Harbor gives us, Google, unlimited protection 2) What are the users going to do any case? Sue us? Migrate to Microsoft Office 365? The minuscule amount of issues caused on 0.1% users is not going to hit our bottom line and the users cannot damage us. 3) We off…

If the full DMCA process was implemented, takedowns could be immediately reverted and then the trolls would have to use the court system as intended. Abusive behavior from bad actors could then be addressed.

This isn't a DMCA takedown.

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#109

Post by shmerl »

Copyright was always bizarre in the sense that any information can be expressed as numbers. So why are some numbers more copyrightable?

Also reminds me this ("Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes"): https://web.archive.org/web/20100607151726/http://www.theoni...

Re: Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

#110

Post by mywittyname »

ehnto wrote: post #89
LudwigNagasena wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A program can never be held accountable, but the person (or the whole company, or both) who decided that it should make management decisions can.

It's possible to read the original quote was as a warning of exactly that. We should all be very wary of letting our code do the walking because the fault should realistically lie with us, but it's as if the software industry feels invincible, and it's not hard to see why.

Yeah, that's basically how I read into it. Or, more specifically, if the computer can't be held accountable, then those doing the holding get to decide who they think is responsible, and that might not end in your favor. In pithy terms, computers make poor scape-goats.

Given the context IBM operates in, that's probably what they are getting at.

Bill Gates tried this argument and lost.

Lawyer during deposition: "So who sent that email?"

BG: "A computer."

Post reply on HN