4 ms·

You can't store Kanye West interview in your Gdrive for violation of hate speech

46 points by Markoff 4y ago

DevKoala 4y ago
I guess it was never “your Gdrive”.
- Markoff 4y ago
  HN title length limits don't really allow to go into detail, so you have to simplify titles
GoOnThenDoTell 4y ago
Regardless of content, scanning your private files is breaking trust
- nomel 4y ago
  Fictitious trust, born from the haphazard clicking of the terms of service and privacy policy “I agree” button. It’s spelled out clear enough that being a lawyer isn’t a requirement.
  - Brian_K_White 4y ago
    Perfectly real trust, in that the user really does trust, and also real in that G really is happy to allow the user to trust them. It's nonfictional trust, just misplaced.
  - clnq 4y ago
    Yes, but we can't expect people to read ToS (much less keep up with ToS changes) for all the software they use. That would be madness - books and volumes worth of legalese just to get basic work done. Not to mention that some of ToS legalese is too open to interpretation. Each of us probably depends on some bit of software with ToS we'd find objectionable, in certain interpretations at least. Regarding Google Drive, I think that the expectation of privacy comes from the name and the way it is marketed and appears to the user. You wouldn't expect a hard drive, or a flash drive, or some other drive to police what content is on it. That is not in the function description of a storage device - networked or not. Perhaps that expectation is now changing, but I think a lot of people still have it. All in all, I don't think that we can blame the users for haphazardly agreeing to ToS. They (probably) need the software, the software is marketed as if it serves simple function while in practice it does quite a bit more, and its ToS can be modified or interpreted as product owners wish. There's not too much users can do but not use it. But what about those users who need it for work, or aren't knowledgeable enough to use other office suites, or self-hosted/NAS backups, or X, Y, Z? It feels as if cloud storage providers are offering an ultimatum to them - either comply with our views or be deprived of what you need.
klyrs 4y ago
Dupe https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33300721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33300721
nimbius 4y ago
google: you cant store that its hate speech GPG: okay..how about now... google: ah yes this data is clean and wholesome now.
- netsharc 4y ago
  One time GMail didn't allow me to send a ZIP file to myself "because the contents might be harmful". I changed the extension to ".itsazip" and it sent fine. Hooray!
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    I wonder if that is a case of mime-type or file-extension?
Findecanor 4y ago
I think it could be reasonable to restrict public access to files with hate speech on a service. Many countries have laws against "distribution" of it. But journalists and researchers do need to be able to store and share it between themselves to be able to report on it.
- matthewmacleod 4y ago
  This is literally what is happening.
threatofrain 4y ago
You can store the video you just can't share it. If we don't like this then we can pass laws to make Google free of any risk for broadcasting such content, and then we'd have anime back on YouTube.
rvz 4y ago
Proof that you don't own the files on your G Drive. It always been Google's hard drive. Not yours and they can delete anything they want and can define what 'hate speech' is, no matter how sloppy the term is. Next time, use an encrypted zip with a passphrase rather than the actual video interview.
api 4y ago
Not your storage, not your files.
emsy 4y ago
Isn’t that kinda proving some of his remarks his right?
- 6nf 4y ago
zxcb1 4y ago
Really? I have both an mp3 and whisper transcription on iCloud
kennu 4y ago
It's weird how many people confuse "storing" with "sharing" because it seems to support their pre-determined narrative. I.e., to my best knowledge, you an store the file in GDrive, but you can't use GDrive to share it to others.
- Markoff 4y ago
  you can't share it even with yourself unless you don't use exactly same account which uploaded it kind of ridiculous or share it with wife, sure they block me from sharing it, it's not like I can show it to her in person in same household, phew, they stopped hate speech...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

46 points by Markoff 4y ago

DevKoala 4y ago

I guess it was never “your Gdrive”.

Markoff 4y ago
HN title length limits don't really allow to go into detail, so you have to simplify titles

GoOnThenDoTell 4y ago

Regardless of content, scanning your private files is breaking trust

nomel 4y ago
Fictitious trust, born from the haphazard clicking of the terms of service and privacy policy “I agree” button. It’s spelled out clear enough that being a lawyer isn’t a requirement.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Perfectly real trust, in that the user really does trust, and also real in that G really is happy to allow the user to trust them. It's nonfictional trust, just misplaced.
- clnq 4y ago
  Yes, but we can't expect people to read ToS (much less keep up with ToS changes) for all the software they use. That would be madness - books and volumes worth of legalese just to get basic work done. Not to mention that some of ToS legalese is too open to interpretation. Each of us probably depends on some bit of software with ToS we'd find objectionable, in certain interpretations at least. Regarding Google Drive, I think that the expectation of privacy comes from the name and the way it is marketed and appears to the user. You wouldn't expect a hard drive, or a flash drive, or some other drive to police what content is on it. That is not in the function description of a storage device - networked or not. Perhaps that expectation is now changing, but I think a lot of people still have it. All in all, I don't think that we can blame the users for haphazardly agreeing to ToS. They (probably) need the software, the software is marketed as if it serves simple function while in practice it does quite a bit more, and its ToS can be modified or interpreted as product owners wish. There's not too much users can do but not use it. But what about those users who need it for work, or aren't knowledgeable enough to use other office suites, or self-hosted/NAS backups, or X, Y, Z? It feels as if cloud storage providers are offering an ultimatum to them - either comply with our views or be deprived of what you need.

klyrs 4y ago

Dupe https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33300721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33300721

nimbius 4y ago

google: you cant store that its hate speech GPG: okay..how about now... google: ah yes this data is clean and wholesome now.

netsharc 4y ago
One time GMail didn't allow me to send a ZIP file to myself "because the contents might be harmful". I changed the extension to ".itsazip" and it sent fine. Hooray!
- withinboredom 4y ago
  I wonder if that is a case of mime-type or file-extension?

Findecanor 4y ago

I think it could be reasonable to restrict public access to files with hate speech on a service. Many countries have laws against "distribution" of it. But journalists and researchers do need to be able to store and share it between themselves to be able to report on it.

matthewmacleod 4y ago
This is literally what is happening.

threatofrain 4y ago

You can store the video you just can't share it. If we don't like this then we can pass laws to make Google free of any risk for broadcasting such content, and then we'd have anime back on YouTube.

rvz 4y ago

Proof that you don't own the files on your G Drive. It always been Google's hard drive. Not yours and they can delete anything they want and can define what 'hate speech' is, no matter how sloppy the term is. Next time, use an encrypted zip with a passphrase rather than the actual video interview.

api 4y ago

Not your storage, not your files.

emsy 4y ago

Isn’t that kinda proving some of his remarks his right?

6nf 4y ago

zxcb1 4y ago

Really? I have both an mp3 and whisper transcription on iCloud

kennu 4y ago

It's weird how many people confuse "storing" with "sharing" because it seems to support their pre-determined narrative. I.e., to my best knowledge, you an store the file in GDrive, but you can't use GDrive to share it to others.

Markoff 4y ago
you can't share it even with yourself unless you don't use exactly same account which uploaded it kind of ridiculous or share it with wife, sure they block me from sharing it, it's not like I can show it to her in person in same household, phew, they stopped hate speech...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]