5 ms·

Why not do it exactly like Drive, where you can choose between sharing by link, or sharing with Google accounts?

pkulak 7y ago
Well, you can already share photos with other Google accounts. It's even the default. You have to specifically click the "Create Link" button on the share page to do differently.
- sp332 7y ago
  That is not what happens in the video.
- DominikPeters 7y ago
  In Photos, it looks like you can choose between the two, but actually sharing to a Google account also creates a link without making it explicit.
  - pkulak 7y ago
    Oh, I see what you mean. It looks like if the person you share to doesn't use Photos, they get a link sent by email. It takes a pretty deep understanding to avoid sending a link.
  - chaosite 7y ago
    It doesn't matter if the person you're sharing with is using Photos or not. Either way, a link is created, and you can access it without being logged in to a Google Account at all.
- chaosite 7y ago
  No, that's wrong, and that's the thing that's surprising here. If you share with a Google account a globally shareable link is created and is emailed to the person.
ehsankia 7y ago
And then you get dozens of email from every friend requesting access to the photo, which you have to manually approve? Might work nicely for a document, but that would be a really shitty UX for sharing photos with friend group and relatives.
- lukeschlather 7y ago
  Why not do it like Facebook and make it totally impossible to turn a private photo into a public link without downloading the image and re-uploading it? This isn't really about dealing with the case where the person you're sharing with is sharing without your consent. The problem is really a case of data vs. metadata. If I get your browsing history it shouldn't give me access to all your private messages and private photos. As-described, getting access to metadata (urls) gives full access to data, which is not a good default behavior.
  - ehsankia 7y ago
    Facebook has an entirely different usage model. People have "profiles" and when you connect to someone's "profile", you see all their photos. Google Photos doesn't have an equivalent. Photos are in your account, and whenever you want, you share single ones, or group of them in an album, with friends. There's no concept of "friends" on Photos.

Well, you can already share photos with other Google accounts. It's even the default. You have to specifically click the "Create Link" button on the share page to do differently.

sp332 7y ago
That is not what happens in the video.
DominikPeters 7y ago
In Photos, it looks like you can choose between the two, but actually sharing to a Google account also creates a link without making it explicit.
- pkulak 7y ago
  Oh, I see what you mean. It looks like if the person you share to doesn't use Photos, they get a link sent by email. It takes a pretty deep understanding to avoid sending a link.
- chaosite 7y ago
  It doesn't matter if the person you're sharing with is using Photos or not. Either way, a link is created, and you can access it without being logged in to a Google Account at all.
chaosite 7y ago
No, that's wrong, and that's the thing that's surprising here. If you share with a Google account a globally shareable link is created and is emailed to the person.

ehsankia 7y ago

And then you get dozens of email from every friend requesting access to the photo, which you have to manually approve? Might work nicely for a document, but that would be a really shitty UX for sharing photos with friend group and relatives.

lukeschlather 7y ago
Why not do it like Facebook and make it totally impossible to turn a private photo into a public link without downloading the image and re-uploading it? This isn't really about dealing with the case where the person you're sharing with is sharing without your consent. The problem is really a case of data vs. metadata. If I get your browsing history it shouldn't give me access to all your private messages and private photos. As-described, getting access to metadata (urls) gives full access to data, which is not a good default behavior.
- ehsankia 7y ago
  Facebook has an entirely different usage model. People have "profiles" and when you connect to someone's "profile", you see all their photos. Google Photos doesn't have an equivalent. Photos are in your account, and whenever you want, you share single ones, or group of them in an album, with friends. There's no concept of "friends" on Photos.