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

Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 454 posts

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#141

Post by Waterluvian »

pembrook wrote: post #94

After seeing posts like this on HN for years, this one officially scared me enough to completely migrate off Gmail altogether. I’m in the process right now of removing my gmail from any online account. Pro-tip: if you use a password manager, it’s as easy as searching for your Gmail address. For all other accounts, I’ve been able to find them by searching for the phrases “verify your email” or “verify email” or “verif…

I’m not saying this is bad advice. It’s not a bad idea to reduce single points of failure!

But without objectivity about how often this happens, there’s probably a lot of other far worse problems that deserve our attention.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#142

Post by bootloop »

temp8964 wrote: post #132

I am confused. Don't you have to create your own videos first and then upload them to YouTube? Or is that a common practice that for people to delete their local copy of videos after they upload to YouTube? I am defenitely not blaming the person in any way. I just don't understand this behavior after have seen this for several times. Why wouldn't you keep your local copy? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

Some (big) creators store all related material and the videos themselves. Others get rid of everything once the video is finished and uploaded.

Edit: Of all my YT videos I wouldn't know where I have the sources stored although I never deliberately deleted them.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#143

Post by metabagel »

Ekaros wrote: post #102
ilamont wrote: post #97

How many more pleas like this will we see on HN? Or, hear from friends, colleagues, and relatives who have been locked out or denied access to an important service, either through no fault of their own or by an innocent action? No warning. No explanation other than "suspicious activity" or "violation of [vaguely worded] policy." No human to call who can help troubleshoot, other than a tech-savvy friend or relative. N…

We need education. Education to regular people that unless you have a contract with clear clauses and payments involved your data is worth what you pay. Your expectations from free service should be zero. It can go out of business at any time. Or they can stop offering it at anytime.

This is completely wrong. We should expect more from business. You should always be able to extract your data, period. Let’s not defend customer-hostile business models.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#144

Post by lobocinza »

Axsuul wrote: post #121
jdhendrickson wrote: post #56

Mea Culpa I'm in the industry. I knew we should have had backups. She is brilliant but not technical and while the backups would have been expensive and difficult due to size, I should have built multiple NAS and distributed them geographically and used Syncthing to keep them updated. To be clear we were legacy G-suite users and have converted to paying customers, so it was a free service while this happened, and is…

You did the best you could with the information you were given. I don't think anyone should have to resort to building multiple NAS and distributing them geographically. It's 2022 and this an extremely esoteric thing to do. Going forward though, Vimeo feels like a better fit for you guys. Caveat emptor, never rely on free services for critical parts of your operation.

> Caveat emptor, never rely on free services for critical parts of your operation.

Don't rely on a single service. Having the same data at two free services is probably more safe than relying on a single paid service. At least for data loss.

If data is sensitive don't rely on any service, just encrypt it with your own key.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#145

Post by metabagel »

Ekaros wrote: post #128
foxfluff wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that the extent to which a city can do things with your property is governed by law. And it is not in any way similar analogy; this wasn't cleaning up an abandoned account taking up public space, this was a sudden takedown of an active account that did not violate any rules or laws.

And why shouldn't they have right to remove such content? Clearly it wasn't following intent of the site. And the user didn't really lose anything, as they still have the originals. Which in no way have been affected.

You haven’t bothered to carefully read the post.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#147

Post by foxfluff »

Ekaros wrote: post #128
foxfluff wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that the extent to which a city can do things with your property is governed by law. And it is not in any way similar analogy; this wasn't cleaning up an abandoned account taking up public space, this was a sudden takedown of an active account that did not violate any rules or laws.

And why shouldn't they have right to remove such content? Clearly it wasn't following intent of the site. And the user didn't really lose anything, as they still have the originals. Which in no way have been affected.

> And why shouldn't they have right to remove such content?

They should, but they should also clearly communicate what content they consider acceptable and I think they should also notify the user and give them time to move their things out if G decides the content is deemed unacceptable. Especially if the content is not obviously and egregiously violating the terms of service and hasn't been considered a problem for the past seven years. Pulling the rug like that all of a sudden isn't cool.

If I offer to hold your grocery bag while you go to the restroom, do you think it's OK for me to throw it all away because after digging aronud a bit, I notice you have bought apples I don't like? What if I've been repeatedly extending the same courtesy for the past ten years and never had a problem with these apples until today? What if I advertise myself as a free bag holding service by the entrance to the restroom?

I think people should have the expectation that if a company (or individual) offers a service and holds on to your property (be it digital or physical), they should treat it responsibly and not just trash it all out of the blue.

> Clearly it wasn't following intent of the site.

That does not seem clear at all based on a reading of youtube's policies.

> And the user didn't really lose anything, as they still have the originals.

That's not something Google can decide or verify. Instead, they could help the user move their stuff out and that would ensure they still have everything.

But I like this line of arguing; I think copyright infringement is ok because the copyright holder still has their original copy which has in no way been affected.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#149

Post by ComradePhil »

camkego wrote: post #112
gruez wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>At some point the FDA didn't exist and we decided to create it to regulate an industry. FDA, youtube edition: alphabet is the only company approved to host videos for public consumption, because they're the only one that has an approved copyright/hate speech filter (regulated for safety, efficacy, ADA compliance, and to be non-discriminatory). All other sites are prohibited from operating unless they spend $5B to ge…

This is exactly why Facebook has so many video ads promoting new regulations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kur94OyXf3U

The video has no information about what they want the government to regulate. It links to this page:

https://about.fb.com/regulations/

Which then links to this page:

https://about.fb.com/news/2019/03/four-ideas-regulate-intern...

Basically, what I gathered is that they want to create a high barrier to entry for their potential competitors, as one would expect. There is nothing useful to people in those regulations.

Re: Tell HN: YouTube and how my wife lost 7 years of work

#150

Post by ziml77 »

jdhendrickson wrote: post #56

Mea Culpa I'm in the industry. I knew we should have had backups. She is brilliant but not technical and while the backups would have been expensive and difficult due to size, I should have built multiple NAS and distributed them geographically and used Syncthing to keep them updated. To be clear we were legacy G-suite users and have converted to paying customers, so it was a free service while this happened, and is…

The important thing for your business going forward is to ensure that you have good contracts. Your contract with YouTube was their terms of service. Those terms basically give you no guarantees yet give Google immense freedom.

I think Vimeo is a good choice for hosting new videos. For archival I would consider just using a single NAS of your own and then have that replicate to Amazon Glacier in at least 1 other region (unless you already have the rack space and someone to physically manage the NAS box in another region).

Post reply on HN