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

391–400 of 609 posts

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

#391

Post by hulitu »

jongjong wrote: post #315
elif wrote: post #276

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 child…

Haha yeah, in Europe there are often naked children running around at the beach. In Germany, there are places (especially lakes) where everyone is walking around, swimming and sunbathing naked - Sometimes the whole family. For me it was quite a shock initially but now I think it's fine.

People naked: ok. Pictures: nok.

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

#392

Post by judge2020 »

_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’s legal for Google to give up user data (under their privacy policy), but the government can’t search them for a user’s data without a warrant.

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

#394

Post by googlryas »

fortran77 wrote: post #360
googlryas wrote: post #336

Have you ever hated child porn so much that you sent private medical photos of someone's naked children to multiple strangers? If not, you obviously aren't as committed as Google about ending CSAM.

And the center for missing and exploited children is not a law enforcement agency and uses volunteers! That’s outrageous

I wonder how many pedophiles volunteer for this(or do content reviews for Google et al), and surreptitiously copy pictures they're intended to review.

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

#396

Post by cmonnow »

OOPMan wrote: post #365
yyyk wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Religious guilt is an ineffective motivator of change. >Source: human history. The alcohol consumption statistics of certain ME states strongly disprove your thesis.

Ah yes, a bunch of rather totalitarian societies as the model to strive for, great jumping off point.

No post body was provided.

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

#397

Post by cmonnow »

InCityDreams wrote: post #280
bart_spoon wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No post body was provided.

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

#398

Post by dgfitz »

jwie wrote: post #333
dgfitz wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

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

This has so many holes in it you’re making Swiss cheese look rational.

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

I expect you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

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

#399

Post by superchroma »

mikece wrote: post #8
amelius wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also a permanent stain on Google's reputation.

Google has a responsibility, to a limited degree, to turn over to law enforcement anything that they know about abuse that comes through their system. More likely, the trigger for that is set really low as a corporate CYA and to pass the buck. I can totally see Google's point of view on this: We're providing a free* service to you, we're not going to stick our neck out and risk ANY liability of being blamed of storin…

I'd disagree. The rules seem to be either that you moderate and you're on the hook, or you don't and you're not, and you just need to respond to reported abuse. I personally think it would be better if Google acted like a blind medium; like a mailman. We've seen targeted abuse by employees to others they know, and we've seen anonymous, non-targeted abuse through application of policy, like here, and in all cases, because Google has pioneered a cutting edge zero-support system and also employs a large pile of lawyers, there is absolutely no recourse to be had unless you're famous on twitter or know a Google employee.

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

#400

Post by lupire »

christophilus wrote: post #100
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.

I’d put pretty good money on almost every family having pictures of their naked kids doing some shenanigans. I know I have those pictures. My parents have those pictures of me and my sister. Quite a few, as I seemed to enjoy trying to run about naked… Bill Waterson somehow managed to sneak watercolor paintings of a naked little boy into every major newspaper under the guise of being a “comic strip”— the perv.

A lot of people don't, specifically because they are aware of the tremendous risk of an insane government or corporation ruining their life over innocent behavior.

Dare I say that it is a peek into how Black people feel when they go out in public to do...anything.

Post reply on HN