51–60 of 199 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
right but most people take pictures with their phones nowadays, which might automatically backup up to google photos.
And the supermajority of users of this set of systems and features are entirely technically unaware of how to micromanage it. To them, they have a phone that backs up to the cloud.
This is the one that causes me to finally commit an entire weekend to getting off Google. Because I have the exact same kinds of photos on my phone, auto-backed up to Google Photos, intended for his physician.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish we had a portable email address format, like phone numbers are, instead of being inherently tied to a provider.
Buy a domain name, now you have a portable email address.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you have to use GCP, use a burner account Does that actually help? Don't they collect enough of your data to be able to correlate accounts?
You're going to have to start using your GCP like it's a freedom fighting session. Never used from the same public wifi. Don't use a public wifi within xDistance from your house. Only interact with GCP from a freshly spun up VM/Tails boot/etc. If no available wifi access, only use a mobile hotspot that is prepaid in cash where the burner was bought by someone else (so their shiny mugs are on the security camera), buy…
That Google snoops and watches your video, photos and emails should not be a surprise to anyone in 2022. If your entire online identity is tied to a string that ends in @gmail.com they own you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might be worth remembering we only have one side of the story here. How do we know we can thoroughly trust the Dad any more than we can thoroughly trust Google? Perhaps there are more pictures Dad took the article doesn't know about? Perhaps Google can't verify it was indeed Dad's child in the images? Perhaps there is more to the story than what the article lets on...perhaps not. We will never really know.
This is always true, and a fundamental reason why free societies adopted the notion of open courts: to ensure that all sides of the story are known and innocent people don't suffer based on ifs and maybes.
Typically if you win arbitration or court, the losing party pays the lawyers anyway - so why did he not pursue this?
This is the one that causes me to finally commit an entire weekend to getting off Google. Because I have the exact same kinds of photos on my phone, auto-backed up to Google Photos, intended for his physician.
Shit, this gave me pause. My dog has crypto* and my vet asked me to send him pics at various states of arousal so I have numerous pics of dog junk on my phone. * Cryptorchidism is the medical term that refers to the failure of one or both testicles (testes) to descend into the scrotum.
Thanks for the footnote, it’s quite confusing otherwise. :)
Protecting children is important. AI is imperfect.
But there is no reason the keep the account suspended once it’s clear there was no wrongdoing.
This man is innocent of doing anything wrong. Google had suspended him, and removed access to all his online account data. And refuses to reinstate.
We balance out liberties with responsibilities all the time. We allow the state power to protect children, and corporations have the right to assist them.
There are careful balancing acts being done.
But there is no balancing act here. There is no justification for Googles action.