4 ms·
Still not seeing what's scary there. If you don't want other people to see your photos, you shouldn't be sending (or uploading) them anywhere. If you don't want
by Retra 8y ago
Still not seeing what's scary there. If you don't want other people to see your photos, you shouldn't be sending (or uploading) them anywhere. If you don't want to see ads, don't use services that show ads.
Sure, image classification can be done anywhere. People could classify their own images without any algorithm. The point is, image classification isn't scary, and I don't see how it could be. Using classifications to manipulate people might be scary, but that has little to do with whether it is done by Google, the server, or the client. If you don't want your images classified, don't send them to photo stores whose entire reason for being is the organization and classification of data.
- JeremyBanks 8y ago> Still not seeing what's scary there. If you don't want other people to see your photos, you shouldn't be sending (or uploading) them anywhere. That's disingenuous: Google strongly and repeatedly encourages Android users to enable Google Photos for private backup with a single click. Users don't like to lose photos, and their phone vendor is telling them how to avoid it. This often isn't an informed or premeditated decision.
- Retra 8y agoSure, that's a problem, but a very different problem. I don't think I've ever seen a profit-focused company seriously give any weight to encouraging its customers to make good, informed decisions.
- morpheuskafka 8y agoI always am puzzled by this type of argument. Surely it is not wrong for a company to advertise its own products and make it easy to sign up. It's on the user to be a critical consumer and it stands to reason that if you opt in to a service called "Company A Photos" that Company A might just have some access to your photos to provide services.