111–120 of 609 posts
> Not only did he lose emails, contact information for friends and former colleagues, and documentation of his son’s first years of life, his Google Fi account shut down, meaning he had to get a new phone number with another carrier. Without access to his old phone number and email address, he couldn’t get the security codes he needed to sign in to other internet accounts, locking him out of much of his digital life.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure where you'd upload the photos to Google domains? Assuming, of course, that you don't use your personal account for your domains - that'd be crazy!
If it’s personal domains, then it would make sense to use a personal account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it’s personal domains, then it would make sense to use a personal account.
Not to mention Google will link accounts and ban across them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm an atheist, and I intensely disagree with the sexualisation of everything in our society dressed as a new sexual revolution, and see it as a direct effect of capitalism. What say you
I think you'll have to expand a bit on that. 1)Government makes companies liable for hosted third party content 2)Companies set up workflows to detect said content 3)??? 4)Blame capitalism
> A Google spokeswoman said the company stands by its decisions, even though law enforcement cleared the two men. Wow. Just wow. This is worse than the usual Google's automated screw-ups. In this case, Google was notified of the issue by the NYT. Yet they actively chose to continue to screw over their victims just because they can. > In a statement, Google said, “Child sexual abuse material is abhorrent and we’re com…
What do you think is the ratio of innocent to nefarious pictures of naked children Google encounters in aggregate? This is relevant to how outraged one should be by this story. I think it is probably > 1:100000. As such, probably not much outrage is warranted, although it’s obviously not great for this one guy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The word fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signals 'something not desirable.'" --George Orwell
Yeah also think the word/concept fascism doesn’t fit here. While it is obviously oppressive or unjust, it is a company, so what would be a better fit?
controversial opinion: as much as everybody knows that China isn't exactly championing the western way of life and western democratic standards, I keep my private files in a Chinese cloud (backups are kept private in a NAS in my house). Why? Because they are not in contact with our authorities and, frankly, the chances my private files will be of any interest for Chinese authorities are close to zero. Not that I have…
controversial opinion: as much as everybody knows that China isn't exactly championing the western way of life and western democratic standards, I keep my private files in a Chinese cloud (backups are kept private in a NAS in my house). Why? Because they are not in contact with our authorities and, frankly, the chances my private files will be of any interest for Chinese authorities are close to zero. Not that I have…
This. China, unlike the U.S., is not gonna ask other countries to extradite me if they ever find me in violation of whatever bullshit law they have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you think is the ratio of innocent to nefarious pictures of naked children Google encounters in aggregate? This is relevant to how outraged one should be by this story. I think it is probably > 1:100000. As such, probably not much outrage is warranted, although it’s obviously not great for this one guy.
Wow, I'd guess the opposite when we consider the base rate. Seems like a classic Bayesian problem. It's fairly normal for parents to take pictures of their children naked in the bathtub/at the beach/ camping/etc. Conversely, I'd expect actual pedophiles and CSAM producers to be really quite rare. So even a relatively low base-rate of normal parents with normal nude photos would likely dwarf CSAM upon detection. So, i…
And what I understand is that each of these private photos of their children that parents take on an Android phone with Google cloud enabled gets specifically flagged to be shown to a stranger working for Google.
That sounds pretty insane to me.