3 ms·

User stores data in the cloud. User: surprised pikachu face.

• uoaei 4y ago
  There is no reason a priori that companies should be looking at private data, even automated agents thereof. The fact that they do monitor that content represents some kind of deviation from the null hypothesis that is important to identify and explicate.
  • nathancahill 4y ago
    In fact the opposite is true, companies care about what their servers are being used for, both to prevent abuse and legal liability. Any impression users may have to the contrary is a result of marketing and the widespread concept of "the cloud" as a nebulous entity. E2E encrypted services are the exception, not the rule. This mischaracterization extends so far that when Apple announced plans to turn on E2EE for photos (necessitating an on-device scanning tool for banned photos before upload), the uproar against it was vast and unanimous. So now we still have the same photo scanning on Apple's servers, and no E2EE.
• domador 4y ago
  This is a pretty pessimistic comment. Cloud storage companies should, can, and have been held accountable for violating their users' privacy, including when they themselves are the violators.
  • judge2020 4y ago
    Using data to detect abuse is a very different situation from using it in something like ad personalization. The companies that provide cloud storage still need to make a profit, and that means reducing overhead on things like human spam and DMCA processing; A few people abusing free/cheap accounts will just increase everyone's data costs.
    • metadat 4y ago
      This isn't an acceptable justification for what is happening. Removing people's legitimate private, non-spam, non-abusive documents should never ever happen.