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

A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 609 posts

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#211

Post by [deleted] »

seszett wrote: post #106
encryptluks2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the way Google likely ties your accounts all together a wrong decision on any Google account even if not the same account for your domains could end up having all your domains stolen by Google.

What I'd like to know if if they actually deactivate multiple linked accounts when any one of them gets flagged. I have three accounts, one more for personal things, one more professional, and a third one with my current country as a location for getting local apps in the Play Store. Google knows I am the same person, even though they are different accounts, so are the two other accounts safe when one of the three ge…

[deleted]

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#212

Post by beebeepka »

Gigachad wrote: post #128
MrDresden wrote: post #102

I keep telling anyone who will listen that they need to move every aspect of their online identity away from the big tech giants, and make sure that each type of service (email, webpage, memory storage, document storage, backups, contacts, etc) is compartmentalized in such a way that if one gets removed then it wont affect the others in any way. Imagine having all your memories in the form of images and videos taken…

This event happens so rarely that it would be better advice to tell people to wear a bullet proof vest and helmet when going outside. It’s more likely to benefit them than self hosting media.

How do you know how often it happens?

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#213

Post by mnahkies »

scarface74 wrote: post #30
killingtime74 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snap chat?

A specific medical oriented app. I’ve had a few virtual appointments where they ask me do I have an iPhone for FaceTime. I do. But what do they do for Android users? Which one of the ten soon to be discontinued Google video conferencing apps would the doctor use?

During COVID I had a digital gp appointment. It was specifically about some skin issues which is obviously difficult to communicate over a phone call.

They required me to send them photos to the receptionist over plain email - I complied because they weren't particularly sensitive parts of my body however it did make me mad that this was their system for dealing with sensitive health data

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#214

Post by pas »

zerof1l wrote: post #80

This story should serve as a warning and a motivation to move away from iCloud, Google Cloud, and alike for video and photo storage. The easiest thing is to just purchase a drive or NAS and store your media on it. If you're a bit tech-savvy, you can run your own NextCloud. I run NextCloud on Hetzner, 1TB storage box + web server for a total of $7 a month. Or you can get Hetzner to run the NextCloud for you for about…

> 1TB storage box

hah, we're a hetzner costumer for .. years now, but I had no idea they have this :D

https://www.hetzner.com/storage/storage-box

so you can connect the NextCloud to the storage account? which protocol do you use for this?

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#215

Post by pas »

bart_spoon wrote: post #210
mulmen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Puritans. We “banned” alcohol for 13 years. America’s greatest battle is with our dark religious past. We claim to be secular but really it’s an aspiration.

You say that as if there is no other reason to ban alcohol than religious belief, and not like alcohol being one of the most negative societal influences in the areas of human health, crime, public safety, and poverty. Just because humans are so cripplingly addicted to alcohol that banning was untenable doesn’t mean it was a bad idea.

there are many reasons to reduce harm.

there are absolutely no reason to ban it, because that only causes more harm.

somehow many people on Earth have a remarkable resistance to nuance.

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#216

Post by tomohawk »

It's time for the people to decide how they want companies that provide utilities to behave, and time for utility companies to stop telling the people how to behave.

In the olden days, if the AT&T monopoly just cut off phone service to a (convicted in court) pedo, they would get in severe trouble. We the people imposed limits on powerful companies. Even today, with the monopoly split up, this would not be legal. Let alone just deciding on their own initiative to do it.

In this case, a utility provider is cutting off service based on a digital rumor. They are judge, jury, and executioner.

The laws governing telcos were made over a period of 150 years, but most particularly in the 1920s and 1930s.

Google does not fit these laws because they do not charge for them (perhaps this should be made illegal?) and monetize them differently. Also, obviously the services are far beyond simple voice or fax. And yet, they are definitely utilities.

Utility companies must not be politically partisan or active. Mixing those two things is toxic and bad for society. It also is too much of a temptation for politicians to use the implied power of utilities over the people to silence or supress opposition.

If Google wants to be an activist company, then it will need to shed its utilities. If Google wants to provide utilities, then it needs to shut down its activism.

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#218

Post by public_defender »

giantg2 wrote: post #141
mirekrusin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who needs cops if you have an army of robots.

And who needs prisons if the private infrastructure becomes so integral to life that they can just shut you out of participating in society.

Unfortunately prisons, which are increasingly private for-profit enterprises, will continue to exist. Think about it: if you're banned from google, how will your body continue to generate revenue?

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#219

Post by beebeepka »

bart_spoon wrote: post #210
mulmen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Puritans. We “banned” alcohol for 13 years. America’s greatest battle is with our dark religious past. We claim to be secular but really it’s an aspiration.

You say that as if there is no other reason to ban alcohol than religious belief, and not like alcohol being one of the most negative societal influences in the areas of human health, crime, public safety, and poverty. Just because humans are so cripplingly addicted to alcohol that banning was untenable doesn’t mean it was a bad idea.

You are blaming alcohol for people's actions. That's disgusting and horrifying. I wonder what makes you say that. Religious?

Re: A dad took photos of his toddler for a doctor – Google flagged him as a criminal

#220

Post by 9Ljdg6p8ZSzejt »

bmacho wrote: post #144
seszett wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's fairly normal for parents to take pictures of their children naked in the bathtub/at the beach/ camping/etc. 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.

I don't think it is even legal for google to watch my photos, even if i accepted everything they said, and permitted them to do so.

It is. And you did.
Post reply on HN