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

271–280 of 609 posts

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

#271

Post by scarface74 »

some-human wrote: post #261
scarface74 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So instead of depending on three of the largest tech companies with built in redundancies, you want to depend on a fly by night operator with no track record?

You would even avoid DropBox because they also chose to use proven reliable technology until their own technology was good enough?

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

#272

Post by concordDance »

bborud wrote: post #257

This highlights the enormous risk depending on Google, and similar service providers, for email, messaging and other important services is. It isn't so much the policies, but the fact that Google will never do anything to help you when they get it wrong. You are always only one algorithmic fuck-up away from losing access and having to spend days and weeks dealing with the consequences. I think the only way to deal wi…

The best way to solve this is to DE-regulate. Make Google etc explicitly not responsible for proactively monitoring people's private data and then said data will remain private.

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

#273

Post by felix318 »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #82
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.

I'm an atheist, and I intensely disagree with the sexualisation of everything in our society dressed as a new sexual revolution, and see it as a direct effect of capitalism. What say you

The other day I read something about how society must “prevent the oversexualization of children” and that got me thinking, who will protect the oversexualization of society itself? The answer was obvious to me.

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

#274

Post by tzs »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #16

controversial opinion: as much as everybody knows that China isn't exactly championing the western way of life and western democratic standards, I keep my private files in a Chinese cloud (backups are kept private in a NAS in my house). Why? Because they are not in contact with our authorities and, frankly, the chances my private files will be of any interest for Chinese authorities are close to zero. Not that I have…

> Because they are not in contact with our authorities and, frankly, the chances my private files will be of any interest for Chinese authorities are close to zero.

The problems that befell the fellow in this story were not due to Google being in contact with the authorities. The authorities unobtrusively investigated, determined that the reports were false positives, and closed the case.

If all Google had done was contact authorities he would have never even known that he was investigated, and there would have been no impact at all on his life.

China has bans in most of the same categories that the US and other western countries do, but typically broader (e.g., they broadly ban pornography). If ISPs there are on the lookout for things China bans you are probably more likely to have a false positive there than with a western ISP.

The question then is a Chinese ISP more likely to overreact on a false positive than a western ISP? I believe China is more likely to hold a business responsible for the bad acts of that businesses customers, which I expect would lead to Chinese businesses being more likely to overreact.

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

#275

Post by NelsonMinar »

mikece wrote: post #4

I worked in a 1 Hour Photo when I was in college. The standing rule we had is that any photos of naked adults were not printed (the customer was given their negatives though). In the case of naked children if it was the typical "kid taking their first bath" it was fine but if there was any doubt we had a manager review it. I think we had to call the cops a couple times (more for passing the buck than making an offici…

The tradition at 1 Hour Photos was to keep the prints of the naked adults for yourself.

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

#276

Post by elif »

From my travels, my impression has been that America in particular treats child nudity as completely, unexceptionally obscene, beyond even adult nudity.

Compared to a beach in Europe, where nearly half of children under 2 run naked, there seems to be no grey area or minimum acceptability in the US.

It makes me wonder if our hypersexualized treatment of child nudity /actively contributes/ to the sexualization of children in our culture.

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

#277

Post by diebeforei485 »

hk1337 wrote: post #249

It doesn’t seem right for the doctor to ask the parents to take pictures then send them over SMS, email, or whatever they asked them to use. Why wouldn’t this just be done within the privacy of the doctor’s office?

Telemedicine has been thing well before 2020.

You shouldn't have to travel to a doctor's office to get privacy. There is nothing wrong with a parent or a doctor taking pictures of a medical condition (rashes, etc).

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

#278

Post by mysterydip »

scarface74 wrote: post #240
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…

My pictures and videos are synced to iCloud, Google Photos, and MS OneDrive. My photos are synced to Amazon Drive too.

Do you use the same email or 2FA for all of those? If so, you still have a potential single point of failure if that provider decides to ban your account.

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

#279

Post by prox »

mindslight wrote: post #225
prox wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah also think the word/concept fascism doesn’t fit here. While it is obviously oppressive or unjust, it is a company, so what would be a better fit?

At least to me, it seems quite appropriate to characterize the autocratic merging of government and corporate power as "fascism". Yes, it's missing some specific trappings of the original fascists, but definitions adapt and widen over time. In fascism 1.0, singular authority vested with the head of government who then subjugated every other institution under the government. In fascism 2.0, power consolidates from the…

That seems more fitting. Authoritarian seems also very fitting and fits the definition of limiting options for civilians in favour of the state/or it’s organisation.

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

#280

Post by InCityDreams »

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.

Let the human decide? If you're religious, God created everything - enjoy it all, or not...as you wish! Just don't force your ideas on others.
Post reply on HN