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

491–500 of 609 posts

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

#491

Post by sillystuff »

anon291 wrote: post #294
ISL wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One solution to many of these concerns is a periodic backup (via Takeout) of your Google account.

Do you have any suggestions for open-source Android backup solutions that can back up everything? Because I'm having a hard time finding any.

You need root to backup all app data:

Neo Backup - Currently maintained, and available on fdroid.

Titanium backup and restore - I don't think it is still maintained, but it still works.

Seedvault which does not require root can't backup a lot of things.

Depending on your phone, you may be able to backup everything with twrp, but it doesn't work with some new-ish phones.

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

#492

Post by Aeolun »

hedora wrote: post #452
tomohawk wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you recomend, then? At least the two I recommend won't destroy your whole digital life if they don't like you.

I think the issue is that you're trying to optimize for patient privacy, quality of health care service, and doctor productivity. The other commenter is trying to optimize for "doctor does not go to jail". The two goals are mutually exclusive in this case.

I think one person is trying to optimize for patient convenience. I strongly feel that this is one of those cases where patients do not think about their privacy for once second.

It’d be more interesting to meet the patients where they are and find some way to securely get those images into a medical file.

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

#493

Post by Aeolun »

tomxor wrote: post #344

> Mark and his wife gave no thought to the tech giants that made this quick capture and exchange of digital data possible Well... here we are, normal people don't think it's possible to transfer an image over the internet without a megacorp being in the middle of it. Pretty strong sign something has gone wrong.

Maybe they felt like their purchase of a $1000 phone entitled them to the right to use it as they please?

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

#494

Post by shrimpx »

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 wonder why the person decided 7k was not worth the lawsuit. Their legal counsel told them it was hopeless to win anything?

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

#495

Post by tzs »

bpodgursky wrote: post #449
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.…

Isn't the ability to migrate phone numbers a legal requirement for carriers? Edit: yeah it is [1] > Phone companies are required by law to port your number out when you start service with a new carrier. According to the FCC, a company can't refuse to port your number even if you have an outstanding balance or unpaid termination fees. [1] https://telzio.com/blog/what-to-do-when-a-carrier-refuses-to...

When porting to a new carrier, the new carrier asks for your account information and PIN for the old carrier. The new carrier provides that to the old carrier to prove that the port request came from you.

It looks like with Google you are supposed use the Google Fi app or website to obtain a “port out number” and PIN [1] to give the new carrier when they ask for account number and PIN.

If you accounts have been banned I wonder if you can still get that information?

[1] https://support.google.com/fi/answer/10888419?hl=en

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

#496

Post by detaro »

Aeolun wrote: post #480
googlryas wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially because you can take photos with someone's phone without locking it. All you need is brief physical access to the phone.

You also need brief physical access to a naked child at the same time as the phone. That may be a bit more difficult to arrange.

Or a tablet displaying such an image. Even if you can tell it's a photo of a photo, it's not like a reviewer is going to go "oh that's fine then"

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

#497

Post by erdos4d »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #348
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…

In the us, there is an unspoken belief that preventing criminals from ""winning"" is more important than protecting citizens. This is why police fired into a stolen minivan that had a unrelated child and a shoplifting/carjacking suspect in it, killing both. Protecting the child took a back seat to punishing the prep. Therefore CP laws very quickly stopped being about protecting the children and more about punishing t…

> In the us, there is an unspoken belief that preventing criminals from ""winning"" is more important than protecting citizens.

It's sad you are downvoted for this, because it sums up the American mentality perfectly. Some people really can't handle the truth.

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

#500

Post by TylerGlaiel »

tzs wrote: post #495
bpodgursky wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the ability to migrate phone numbers a legal requirement for carriers? Edit: yeah it is [1] > Phone companies are required by law to port your number out when you start service with a new carrier. According to the FCC, a company can't refuse to port your number even if you have an outstanding balance or unpaid termination fees. [1] https://telzio.com/blog/what-to-do-when-a-carrier-refuses-to...

When porting to a new carrier, the new carrier asks for your account information and PIN for the old carrier. The new carrier provides that to the old carrier to prove that the port request came from you. It looks like with Google you are supposed use the Google Fi app or website to obtain a “port out number” and PIN [1] to give the new carrier when they ask for account number and PIN. If you accounts have been banne…

Haven't had to do this with google (yet) but filing a complaint with the FCC usually gets you a very prompt response from the company the complaint is about, and I imagine this would be the best thing to do in this case https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
Post reply on HN