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

261–270 of 609 posts

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

#261

Post by some-human »

scarface74 wrote: post #244
some-human wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is finding them. If a layman looks for a cloud back up provider that isn't one of the BigTech group - uses Duck Duck Go and finds a small company offering 10GB back up for free. Unfortunately for them, that service is using AWS for storage, so ultimately despite they're best effort they're just using amazon cloud storage.

People have a problem finding DropBox, OneDrive, Box, Apple iCloud?

Dropbox used Amazon until 2016, to only have their own datacentres in the last 5 years. Who's to say they decide that's not economical and move back to aws?

OneDrive IS Microsoft and iCloud IS Apple so they ARE BigTech, the same as Google? I don't see how that argues against the point?

Box is the only one in that seems to qualify? Kinda proves my point that it's not at all easy for a laymen.

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

#262

Post by jwilk »

beebeepka wrote: post #243
benj111 wrote: post #119

I wonder what happens if I share the Nevermind album cover?

I think the baby from that cover tried his luck, and lost, in court recently

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevermind#2021_lawsuit

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

#263

Post by patleeman »

PaulKeeble wrote: post #165
SergeAx wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moved where? Not to iCloud, I hope? Self-hosting mail, calendar and media is too complex task for 99% of population. This is not a solution.

Nowadays you can buy a NAS and plug it into your router and then click the install nextcloud option and you have it running, then you add the app on your phone. Its no where near as difficult to get these level of capability as it used to now that Docker is integrated in a user friendly way in a lot of NAS software.

I run a server at home and I’ve set up Nextcloud.

I don’t trust it to be more reliable than a paid service. The thing about self hosted solutions is you’re completely on your own if something goes wrong. You need to make sure you’re backing things up, that you can restore your Nextcloud configuration if your sql database takes a dump or you fat finger and delete some config files (I’ve done both). Or if you have a power outage or lose internet connection and can’t access vital files, or even something simple like a bad software update causing issues.

While a great option, one can’t simply spin up next cloud and then move everything over like you would a Saas solution as a typical layman.

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

#264

Post by blooalien »

scarface74 wrote: post #221
chasil wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions two independent instances of this process within Google, where appeal is not possible even with a police report that completely exonerates the suspect. It sounds to me as if a class action lawsuit is the most appropriate remedy for the unfortunates who are caught in this predicament. Their only problem is finding each other. For the rest of us, it is unwise to use cloud storage for photos, for se…

It’s unwise to depend on Google with decades of history of poor customer service.

Funny how their motto used to be "Don't be Evil."

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

#265

Post by doliveira »

neurostimulant wrote: post #205

My wife is a doctor and received a few of these kind of images in whatsapp from her patients from time to time. Should she be concerned?

WhatsApp images are supposed to be E2E-encrypted, aren't they? Not sure about the whole Google Drive backup, though.

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

#266

Post by blueflow »

wormer wrote: post #145
blueflow wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Postal? Or deliver the envelope in-person to their box when they are nearby. I learned it like this, its since recently that applying by email more commonly an option.

As someone who's in college and looking/lookedfor internships to do over the summer, postal is literally not an option anymore. Companies will not offer a mailing address to their hiring team at all, and if you send something via mail they will simply not look at it. Also, post-pandemic, most interviews are done via Zoom, so how are you going to do that then? Even if you're in the same area as the company you're appl…

This sounds really bad! Where are you from?

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

#267

Post by some-human »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #241
some-human wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is finding them. If a layman looks for a cloud back up provider that isn't one of the BigTech group - uses Duck Duck Go and finds a small company offering 10GB back up for free. Unfortunately for them, that service is using AWS for storage, so ultimately despite they're best effort they're just using amazon cloud storage.

This is where the small guys kick ass vs the Googles/Microsoft. Try Dropbox, Backblaze etc. Much better experience. Apple is OK UX wise but locked in which sucks.

Dropbox used to be hosted on AWS.

How is a laymen supposed to tell the difference between Backblaze - running their own servers, and a Dropbox-like - which is really just uploading your files to amazon's servers?

That's the point I was trying to make.

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

#268

Post by sandworm101 »

prepend wrote: post #242
soraminazuki wrote: post #15

> A Google spokeswoman said the company stands by its decisions, even though law enforcement cleared the two men. Wow. Just wow. This is worse than the usual Google's automated screw-ups. In this case, Google was notified of the issue by the NYT. Yet they actively chose to continue to screw over their victims just because they can. > In a statement, Google said, “Child sexual abuse material is abhorrent and we’re com…

I suppose it’s defensive behavior. If they admit their mistake now then they could potentially be liable for the damages caused by their mistake years ago. Now any lawsuit would need to determine if there was an error and harm instead of just quantifying the harm. I’d like to contribute to a crowdsource fund to prosecute cases like this. When I was a kid the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund [0] was set up to pay for law…

7000$ is a pitance. Maybe this case is simple, but many will not be. Say they raid a house and confiscate a hard drive. Encrypted or not, that is going to be a huge thing. Arguments will be made about whether anything incriminating was stored on that drive. Just google the cost of a forensic expert witness. Both sides will need one.

Such costs are actually why so many police agencies are backing off of CP investigations. They still prosecute where evidence is clear, such as when someone emails such material openly, but they arent willing to invest the tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars necessary to handle the complex cases involving encrypted communication/storage. 7000$ would be a bare minimum for only the simplest of legal defenses in the simplest of cases.

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

#270

Post by diebeforei485 »

sreevisakh wrote: post #107
Gatsky wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think is the ratio of innocent to nefarious pictures of naked children Google encounters in aggregate? This is relevant to how outraged one should be by this story. I think it is probably > 1:100000. As such, probably not much outrage is warranted, although it’s obviously not great for this one guy.

If it wasn't clear, people aren't objecting to the use of automated tools to prevent crime. It's that there is absolutely no avenue of appeal or review against it even if the law enforcement exonerates them and a big news media reports it. Google has inserted itself into almost all spheres of digital life by hook or crook. It's practically difficult to avoid them in many services - especially email. And now they play…

> big news media reports it

The guy in the article works in the tech industry and lives in a city where a lot of journalists live, so he could get his story into the media.

What about others?

Post reply on HN