Live data from Hacker News

Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

gamesradar.com

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#21
post #17
post #8

It's weird as fuck how people working in these fields have unrestricted access to peoples private information, be it videos, pictures or worse.

"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.

is there any legal obligation in the US that would require YouTube to be able to view all videos uploaded, regardless of privacy?

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#22
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so youtube content moderators can just view anyone's private videos willy nilly?

Yes, this is typically how moderation works on any platform. Unless it is encrypted it's not "private".

If it's a truly private video, it should be only visible by moderation when logged in as a moderator.

If it was an unlisted video, the moderator would just need to know the reference code (URL) for the video, and could share it with anyone.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#23
post #17
post #8

It's weird as fuck how people working in these fields have unrestricted access to peoples private information, be it videos, pictures or worse.

"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.

People know what "private" means. If a company calls something private, but it isn't, then they're the ones who need to reconsider what it means, and call their service something else.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#24

Title is difficult to decipher, here’s what it’s about: > A new report on old privacy incidents [2017] suggests that at least one Nintendo leak came from a Google employee showing off private YouTube videos to a friend.

"Nintendo leak: Google employee accessing private YouTube videos" would be clearer. Showing those videos "only" to a friend isn't really that relevant.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#25
post #3

People will do anything to pump imaginary numbers on the internet. All logic goes out the window for those seeking fame.

I mean how many times have we seen people leak military information on world of tanks (or whatever). These people know they'll get court martialed and still do it anyway. These people doing moderating are getting paid near minimum wage to look at the worst things on the internet, you can blame the individual, but the entire moderation system is setup with cheap contractors they burn out and replace at high rates. Systemic failure is guaranteed.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#26
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.

YouTube has separate unlisted and private options for videos

Are you suggesting that there is an option that blocks YouTube admins from viewing the video?

If it isn't end-to-end encrypted, then the platform operator has access.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#27
post #21
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.

is there any legal obligation in the US that would require YouTube to be able to view all videos uploaded, regardless of privacy?

"Hosting" child pornography for example. The law doesn't say "Oh, it's a private video, that's perfectly fine then".

>regardless of privacy

Maybe you should read the TOS before you use services, you don't have any of that.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#28
post #22
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is typically how moderation works on any platform. Unless it is encrypted it's not "private".

If it's a truly private video, it should be only visible by moderation when logged in as a moderator. If it was an unlisted video, the moderator would just need to know the reference code (URL) for the video, and could share it with anyone.

As mentioned in the article, the original leak was a screenshot from admin.youtube.com

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its from one of the content moderators. they are all hired and managed through recruiting agency. there was over 10k of us while I was there. and most people are just kids with one week of on boarding doing short term contract. whoever did it is blackballed by biggest recruiting agency in the world. way to get your life crazy difficult over reddit points

I never knew Youtube did child labour?

In many states its legal for people 16-18 to work, usually with limitations on hours worked per shift/week an what kind of jobs they can do.

Even then, many older people in the US will call someone 18-20 "kids", even though they're technically adults.

As a US English speaker I took it to mean "a bunch of young and immature people, probably on their first job" when I heard "most people are just kids", not that they're literally hiring 12 year olds or something.

Re: Nintendo leak:employee accessing private YouTube videos

#30
This sort of thing is extremely bad news for Google.

One of the open secrets about how advertising works in the modern era is that brand synergy demands planning years in advance. Google employees, back in the day, could see the marvel cinematic universe release plan out to several years if they knew where to look, as well as console launch dates, major product releases, and other things of that nature. This is because the advertising sector has high-touch, high-value customers, and those customers expect their marketing plan to go off without a hitch. So Googlers have to make time and schedule things like DiRT testing and new feature validation sensitive to those schedules; Warner Bros isn't going to want to hear it if their Superman ad dropped 2 days early because a feature flag was misconfigured.

When Google was smaller, this was fine. But as a 100,000 person company, I believe it is completely infeasible to expect every Googler to keep those secrets. At those scales, you can't really even use the threat of firing to maintain secrecy because you can't really guarantee that the person who's going to replace the fired one is going to be more loyal. So inevitably, either Google locks down its internal infrastructure (turning it into a company other than the kind of company it was in the past), they cap their employee growth (which implies capping their growth in general), or they start losing high value customers who can't trust them to keep a secret.

In practice, they are definitely doing the first two to some extent and that is changing the flavor of the company internally. Part of the secret sauce of old Google is it didn't keep secrets from itself.

Post reply on HN