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

Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

workspaceupdates.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 269 posts

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#151

Post by md_ »

Kerbonut wrote: post #139
jodrellblank wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> " Apple's CSAM would scan your offline photos. " No it wouldn't. It would only scan photos you upload to their cloud. "This feature only impacts users who have chosen to use iCloud Photos to store their photos. It does not impact users who have not chosen to use iCloud Photos. There is no impact to any other on-device data." and "Does this mean Apple is going to scan all the photos stored on my iPhone? No. By desig…

You are spreading misinformation. I don’t know if on purpose or ignorance. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/child-sexual-abuse-scans-apple-... They were very much planning to scan all photos on the device independent of iCloud. It was going to be another phase of the rollout. It was going to be in iOS 15.x and they backpedaled.

I think that's just imprecision on the part of noted tech news outlet CBS.

Apple clearly documented that this was only for iCloud uploaded photos, and indeed the technical description makes clear that this is only designed to work with uploaded photos: https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni....

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#152

Post by md_ »

GeekyBear wrote: post #74
dharmaturtle wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's CSAM would scan your offline photos. Google scanning photos you upload to their cloud seems fine to me. Not a slippery slope.

>Apple's CSAM would scan your offline photos. Apple's plan was to to scan photos that you uploaded to iCloud, only. Even that plan was canceled. Google, however, still does scan everything in your account and has been doing so for the past decade. For instance, this article from 2014: >a man [was] arrested on child pornography charges, after Google tipped off authorities about illegal images found in the Houston susp…

As does Dropbox, Aol, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook, etc, etc.

Whether this is good or bad is a topic for fair debate, I think, but it continues to astound me both how little people are aware of this and that, in comparison, Apple's relatively privacy-preserving approach generated so much flak.

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#154

Post by not2b »

_notathrowaway wrote: post #87
bvxhl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, after Google/YouTube have been aided in growth by the safe harbor clause, they now think that site owner responsibility is not such a bad thing after all? Sounds more to me that they are pulling up the ladder to impede competitors.

I belive this is a really good take on the matter, and somehow you are the first person I see bringing it up.

The EFF has raised this issue repeatedly (that stringent requirements on content filtering will be an advantage to the large players who can afford to do it).

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#155

Post by tobyjsullivan »

dqv wrote: post #84
bdcravens wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're restating GP comment about why Google may need to do this.

No, I am not. The GP said that it is a popular method lately and I explained that it has been happening for years. What TFA is saying is that there will be more communication about files being blocked, but it doesn't suggest to me this is a response to this kind of spam. What probably happened is a file BigCorp wanted to share was opaquely blocked so now Google feels the need to provide better communication. If Googl…

Except that’s not a real solution at all, is it?

Whitelisting orgs would either be an opt-in or opt-out feature. If it’s opt-in, it won’t prevent 99.999% of spam because nobody will set it up. If it’s opt-out, it will break sharing for 99.999% of users.

These are never easy problems.

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#156

Post by tsol »

dc-programmer wrote: post #137
archhn wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The panic is people's fear of the Iron Heel[1]. For most of us, the systems we depend on are controlled by other people. In this chaotic political climate, when these systems start closing in on us, or restricting us in new ways, there's no way of knowing where the tightening will end. Some are incredibly insulated and have no worries about the kind of world we're living in, but others are constantly on edge and feel…

Otherwise known as the slippery slope logical fallacy

No post body was provided.

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#157

Post by notfed »

imchillyb wrote: post #4

If you're not using your own backup solution on your own hardware, located on your own property, you're failing IT 101. Any cloud service can change their Terms of Service without notice, and those changes are almost always detrimental to customers. Seriously, move your saved data in-house. Cloud drives are for ignorant consumers.

If you're using your own hardware on your own property you're probably failing resiliency 101.

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#158

Post by je42 »

kypro wrote: post #127
RIMR wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That "dumb" infrastructure still exists. You can host your own file server, either on your own hardware, or in the cloud. Use of these consumer-grade cloud services comes with pitfalls. I see no utility in pretending that alternatives don't exist though, because they're pretty abundant.

You say this as if it is easy or inexpensive to do well... If it was why would the service even exist in the first place? Surely everyone would just do it themselves. I also don't think you would be arguing that people bothered about WhatsApp or iOS tracking them should just create their own messaging app or mobile OS. The vast majority of software is not just difficult do yourself, but almost completely infeasible.…

Even it if was open source, just deploying something as convenient as google drive is a challenge. i.e. something that works on iOS , Android and Web + has proper access management and has enough storage (including automatic backup).

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#159

Post by throwaway0a5e »

ncann wrote: post #25
qnsi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is also a method for sharing pirated media using google drive. TBH I'm surprised they havent started earlier

People have used Google Drive for sharing pirated stuffs since forever. Google usually blocks it by restricting downloading instead of removing the file, but people kept finding out new ways to get around that, like making a copy of the file in your own drive, or selecting that file and another one to download so that Google zips up both into one zip file before downloading.

People have been using password protected archives to get around pirated content restrictions since forever.

Re: Google Drive may restrict files identified as violating ToS

#160

Post by throwaway0a5e »

anshumankmr wrote: post #18
RegnisGnaw wrote: post #8

Note that you can still access your files, they are not blocking that or restricting that. Its the sharing that's blocked.

But seriously how long is it before Google implements a hashing algorithm (not too dissimilar from Apple's) to check if a user has not uploaded content with a copyright on it and taking some form of action on the user. This feels like a slippery slope to be on.

They have been doing this since forever. Years ago if you tried to upload obviously pirated movie mp4s (like the most popular torrent for a given major release) it would error out.
Post reply on HN