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

331–340 of 609 posts

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

#331

Post by r0m4n0 »

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.

That sounds sorta expensive but I get it. I’m at 3tb of photos and videos. It’s becoming unmanageable… anyone aware of an self hosted multi redundancy photo storage that doesn’t involve manual copying of large amounts of files? Or other non time consuming setups that works with iPhones (me and my SO)?

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

#332

Post by shadowgovt »

This was a predictable outcome of the following factors:

* Criminalizing possession and creation of child pornography equivalently

* Conscripting the tech sector into detecting it via SESTA/FOSTA.

Look forward to reading stories like this ad nauseum.

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

#333

Post by jwie »

dgfitz wrote: post #247
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.

> America’s greatest battle is with our dark religious past. Apparently you’ve never been to Baltimore. There is no dark religious past haunting that city, just corrupt politicians.

I’d live with corruption if they were at least competent at delivering essential services.

I expect most only complain about corruption because the basics aren’t being delivered, not out of a sense of civic responsibility.

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

#334

Post by encryptluks2 »

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…

No they are not safe in general, but sometimes they only enforce it if you are trying to circumvent the reason for the original ban.

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

#335

Post by wyldfire »

_Algernon_ wrote: post #172
judge2020 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t block CSAM because “it’s illegal” - in fact, they can’t be forced to do it without it breaking your 4th amendment rights. Instead, all CSAM reporting and blocking is done at-will by these companies, and some don’t participate (Apple[0]), so it’s a policy decision by these companies. I imagine unblocking someone due to them being exonerated by a government entity is legally risky - perhaps doing so would be…

How can data/files stored on somebody else's computer be subject to 4th amendment rights?

It seems like any agent holding any property on anyone's behalf should be protected against unreasonable search and seizure. "Their effects"

Why would it matter where it's held?

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

#337

Post by scarface74 »

blooalien wrote: post #264
scarface74 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

This isn’t Google being “evil” just incompetent. During their entire history, they’ve had one successful product - advertising.

No Android has not been a financial success. It came out in the Oracle trial that Android had only made Google $27 Billion in profit from its inception through the trial start date.

For comparison, Google pays Apple a reported $14 Billion a year to be the default search engine on iOS devices. Apple makes more in mobile from Google than Google makes from Android.

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

#338

Post by amirhirsch »

happyopossum wrote: post #286
sandworm101 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 investigati…

The reference to $7k isn’t to prosecute a CP case, it was to sue google to reinstate his account so he could get his digital life back.

He could probably find a lawyer willing to take the case on contingency. A jury might decide that he deserves millions in punitive damages and courts are probably the only way to force a human at google to provide support.

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

#339

Post by username223 »

ugjka wrote: post #71

> Not only did he lose emails, contact information for friends and former colleagues, and documentation of his son’s first years of life, his Google Fi account shut down, meaning he had to get a new phone number with another carrier. Without access to his old phone number and email address, he couldn’t get the security codes he needed to sign in to other internet accounts, locking him out of much of his digital life.…

> The more eggs you have in one basket, the more likely the basket is to break

This. Use Yahoo for your email, Verizon for your phone number, Dropbox for your backups, Facebook for your socials… It doesn’t matter which you choose, but fragment your digital life. When one part goes bad, it won’t infect the others.

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

#340

Post by Spooky23 »

zdragnar wrote: post #308
Spooky23 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google isn’t the government, they are a third party who you provide data to. 4th amendment doesn’t apply.

The argument was Google cannot be legally compelled to do so (hence the violation), but they are voluntarily doing so while some others do not.

I’d hazard to guess that the nuance is how they process data.

Google actively inspects and analyzes data, and does so with their cloud services. Microsoft does as well. They have a reasonable means to know that a user has problematic content. Other services that sync but don’t process data do not.

In many US states, you are legally compelled to report child abuse and are subject to criminal sanction. In New Jersey it’s a misdemeanor for anyone who fails to report child abuse. In New York, mandated reporters are compelled to report and have criminal and unlimited civil liability if they do not (and immunity from liability if they do).

For a company like Google or Microsoft, the risk assessment is very complex and the smart, and arguably the morally righteous move is to report.

Post reply on HN