4 ms·

This isn’t actually going to be used against most people posting street photographs, just the ones Twitter wants to get rid of for which there isn’t already a t

This isn’t actually going to be used against most people posting street photographs, just the ones Twitter wants to get rid of for which there isn’t already a tool in the TOS they can selectively apply. Goodthinkful citizens will not be affected.

dsizzle 5y ago
It seems even more restrictive than that -- the person (or some authority) has to notify Twitter and request its removal. It's focused on preventing doxxing and abuse. >When we are notified by individuals depicted, or by an authorized representative, that they did not consent to having their private image or video shared, we will remove it. This policy is not applicable to media featuring public figures or individuals when media and accompanying Tweet text are shared in the public interest or add value to public discourse. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/private-information-policy-update https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/private-i...
- chrismcb 5y ago
  That isn't what it says. It says you have to show proof of the consent first. This makes it super like you can take a photo of anything in public that has random people in the shot
  - dsizzle 5y ago
    Where do you see that? The only portions relevant to this that I see in that blog post are consistent with free-to-post, remove-on-complaint: >When private information or media has been shared on Twitter, we need a first-person report or a report from an authorized representative in order to make the determination that the image or video has been shared without their permission. This paragraph wouldn't even make sense if you had to provide proof on upload. Unless this is to say the uploaded proof was counterfeit or something? >When we are notified by individuals depicted, or by an authorized representative, that they did not consent to having their private image or video shared, we will remove it.

dsizzle 5y ago

It seems even more restrictive than that -- the person (or some authority) has to notify Twitter and request its removal. It's focused on preventing doxxing and abuse. >When we are notified by individuals depicted, or by an authorized representative, that they did not consent to having their private image or video shared, we will remove it. This policy is not applicable to media featuring public figures or individuals when media and accompanying Tweet text are shared in the public interest or add value to public discourse. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/private-information-policy-update https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/private-i...

chrismcb 5y ago
That isn't what it says. It says you have to show proof of the consent first. This makes it super like you can take a photo of anything in public that has random people in the shot
- dsizzle 5y ago
  Where do you see that? The only portions relevant to this that I see in that blog post are consistent with free-to-post, remove-on-complaint: >When private information or media has been shared on Twitter, we need a first-person report or a report from an authorized representative in order to make the determination that the image or video has been shared without their permission. This paragraph wouldn't even make sense if you had to provide proof on upload. Unless this is to say the uploaded proof was counterfeit or something? >When we are notified by individuals depicted, or by an authorized representative, that they did not consent to having their private image or video shared, we will remove it.