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

A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 199 posts

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#181

Post by _aavaa_ »

annoyingnoob wrote: post #180
_aavaa_ wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expect that the software did not work as intended . It’s intended to identify child sexual abuse material and this was not that.

This is one group that Google works with: https://www.missingkids.org/theissues/csam Their definition and yours are not exactly the same. If you read what they have to say, you'll see that the issues are more broad than whatever you personally call abuse, and those issues include exploitation and distribution of images that victims find harmful. Are you a victim of abuse or exploitation? Who are you to determine what…

I didn't give a definition for what constitutes abuse.

My point is that the software is not working as intended. The intent is to stop child abuse, but the software they build does not identify child abuse it identifies what it believes to be naked (semi-naked?) minors. Those are two different things.

A photo you take of your kid for the doctor to see in order to treat them is not CSAM. Neither is a photo of your naked baby.

But those same photos if stolen from you or taken by others for different (less wholesome) reasons would be. But, and most importantly, that context is not to be found in the photo itself.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#182

Post by dorgo »

cypress66 wrote: post #63
bagels wrote: post #7

Does getting your google account blocked prevent you from using GCP? There are so many stories of people losing access to google accounts that it seems way too risky to use GCP when this sort of thing can happen.

I don't know why people use gcp, I would like to hear some opinions. The way I see it, if you don't mind price, you go with AWS (most polished). If you mind price gcp isn't really much cheaper, so you go with something actually cheap like OCI.

afaik there is no alternative to BigQuery on AWS? All alternatives are less managed and require more administration. But I never looked too closely.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#183

Post by cozzyd »

themacguffinman wrote: post #46
xeromal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like there almost needs to be an incognito mode for cameras.

There is. The Android camera app has a button on the top-right corner that lets you quickly switch between saving to "photo storage" or "locked folder". If you pick "locked folder", it saves it to a special folder that isn't backed up to the cloud and requires a screen lock to open.

that does sound like a useful feature for uses like this, but I've never heard of it (and many phones probably come with different camera apps provided by the manufacturer... I have no idea if the Camera app on my Motorola phone is the stock one or not...).

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#184

Post by b112 »

pohuing wrote: post #177
b112 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you'd lose all content you paid for. Apps, games, movies, books, youtube paid things, etc.

Hmm true, apart from apps those are all available outside of android so I didn't really consider it. But that's why I back up my media in the first place, Google can't steal my epub of the book I bought, nor can audible steal the m4a of the audiobook I bought.

Not yet.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#185

Post by jacob019 »

InCityDreams wrote: post #114
jacob019 wrote: post #49

These stories of people being banned by google without recourse are so common, it's amazing that anyone here is still using google for anything important. First of all, get off of gmail. If you do nothing else, get off of gmail. I'm very happy with fastmail, they provide email, calendar, contacts, notes, and some cloud storage for a monthly fee. I've also come to love nextcloud, I started using it to replace google p…

>I would prefer that you use firefox, but chromium works fine too. The rest of your comment seems fair, and equally very interesting, and I'll follow up with fastmail and nextcloud - thanks, but just the particular "I would prefer that you....", seemed jarringly out of place, and made me somewhat happier I use [a heavily customised] Brave [with a very edited hosts file], for no other good reason than ff just doesn't…

That's fair, I just think it's a shame that Firefox's market share has grown so low. It's still my favorite. I also believe that Blink hegemony is bad for open web standards. Use what you want, but not chrome.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#186

Post by 411111111111111 »

csande17 wrote: post #136
bmacho wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can ban you for no reason, just like google.

If you have your own domain, Fastmail banning you is a minor speed bump at worst. You can just point your domain at a different email provider. You can similarly transfer domains between registrars if one of them doesn't like you. And in practice, your domain registrar not liking you is pretty rare; I've only heard of it happening with famously evil alt-right websites and they generally manage to find a registrar tha…

> You can similarly transfer domains between registrars if one of them doesn't like you.

That's sadly not true. There are various examples of individuals loosing their domains as registrar's refuse to release them. The transfer only works if both registers play ball, so it's essentially a very similar situation.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#187

Post by rosnd »

dylan604 wrote: post #158
rosnd wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So just work with a decent domain registrar. Or if you have extra money, just pay the fee to become a registrar yourself.

>So just work with a decent domain registrar. People would have said that about Googs at the beginning (being a decent company) >Or if you have extra money, just pay the fee to become a registrar yourself. yeah, cause just registering a domain and admining your own mail service isn't enough fun already, let's just make spinning up a new registrar part of the deal too?

>yeah, cause just registering a domain and admining your own mail service isn't enough fun already, let's just make spinning up a new registrar part of the deal too?

A little paperwork and you get a nice cli tool to admin your domains, customer support directly from the registry. It's not a terrible option.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#188

Post by 29083011397778 »

googlryas wrote: post #160
josephcsible wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. > “I determined that the incident did not meet the elements of a crime and that no crime occurred,” Mr. Hillard wrote in his report. The police had access to all the information Google had on Mark and decided it did not constitute child abuse or exploitation.

> It contained a letter informing him that he had been investigated as well as copies of the search warrants served on Google and his internet service provider. An investigator, whose contact information was provided, had asked for everything in Mark’s Google account: his internet searches, his location history, his messages and any document, photo and video he’d stored with the company. > * The search, related to “c…

You man the search into his account by the San Fransisco PD? Who later cleared him of any wrongdoing? Note that Google, after hearing from the police, stood by their choice as well.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#189

Post by lrvick »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #79
lrvick wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just use Whonix in a QubesOS VM routed via Tor.

That works? I would expect Google to ban accounts just for using Tor.

You will get lots of captchas during login but otherwise it works fine. I begrudgingly use some Google services every day, but at least via Tor.

Re: A Dad Took Photos of His Kid for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal

#190

Post by iso1631 »

googlryas wrote: post #125
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget that - Google states to the media they had reviewed the situation and had decided to uphold his ban. Good luck convincing them to admit their “appeal” system, and their media review, were mistakes. Google is too arrogant for that.

Wasn't there something like the guy searching for CP before the photo was uploaded, or something along those lines?

Innocent until proven guilty, except when it comes to men being wrongfully accused of child porn
Post reply on HN