3 ms·
I don't know if it's fair to say that they are "randomly" flagging items - I'm guessing they're using a similar set of tools that they use to algorithmically de
by s3r3nity 9y ago
I don't know if it's fair to say that they are "randomly" flagging items - I'm guessing they're using a similar set of tools that they use to algorithmically determine if, say, Youtube videos violate their TOS.
Probably a recent update / bug increased the number of false positives more than expected.
Not that I'm sympathizing with Google - just seeing if there's a less click-baity reason for what's going on.
- confounded 9y agoWell, even a PRNG is deterministic at some level. I think it’s a fine descriptor given the context.
- mikeash 9y agoI think “randomly” is being used here in the sense of “without a good reason.” Regardless of how the content gets classified, they shouldn’t be policing private files.
- duality 9y agoThe anecdata from Twitter were stories about shared docs getting flagged as a ToS violation. Did anyone see the false ToS violation on a totally private, unshared file?
- mikeash 9y agoWhere do you get that from? I randomly checked a few of the tweets and didn't see anything about shared. Nothing about private, either, but that seems like a reasonable default assumption.
- billsmithaustin 9y agoYup. It's a big leap from "Google has a bug" to "you don't control any of your content on the Internet."