Google Ignores Police, Defies Authority. Must Read!

[Danioover9000]

@Swarnim

8 hours ago, Swarnim said:

I think Google's reaction was justified, while the guy should be unbanned and it is unfair to the guy since he meant no harm, I'd rather Google react like this to child nudity than the alternative

Also comparing a cut finger is not a very good comparison. Child nudity is orders of magnitude more serious than that.

   Yes I know, wrong kind of anecdote to use as a comparison UWU. What I was trying say, is that it's not justified that Google keeps his account banned, but I agree it's justified when they made the ban. I'm asking if it's justified, because maybe there's medical reasons and patient-doctor relationship bet6ween his son and doctor? Do they have jurisdiction then? Also, can someone please explain the full context of this????

[Danioover9000]

@aurum

5 hours ago, aurum said:

But that's not the case.

A cut finger is not going to trigger any google alarms. No one cares about that. But a child's genitalia can and should trigger those alarms.

I think the only thing Google didn't do correctly here was reinstate the guy's account. So that's really the only problem to remedy. Perhaps Google needs to funnel more resources towards handling appeals for wrongly banned accounts. Hard to say exactly.

   Forget the shitty analogy. My point, is is it justified that Google did this when it's a confidential patient-doctor relationship? Was it in the medical confidentiality context? I agree Google doing the banning is justified, but what I disagree is them not unbanning until now which is years still, and whether it's a medical confidential setting that the image was being used under.

[Finax]

9 hours ago, aurum said:

I think the only thing Google didn't do correctly here was reinstate the guy's account

@aurum I don’t think so. Googles decision to immediately ban an innocent from all their photos, emails, files, and phone number without evidence is not correct like you suggest. 

Even if they bring the accounts back, the damage was already done, and it can be more damaging then you might of thought to a persons life. 
 

Sending innocent photos to a doctor should not warrant an aggressive ban in the first place. Patient doctor confidentially matters, what happens when a lawyer asks his client to send photos that might be illegal, the lawyer will not report to the police, but Googles ability to intercept those photos goes against the idea of confidentiality, especially when Google does not know the context of the photo. Privacy matters.

 

12 hours ago, Swarnim said:

Child nudity is orders of magnitude more serious than that.

Child porn is serious, but child nudity is different. It should be taken seriously regardless, but a innocent who was following doctors orders should not have led to ban on his accounts including his emails and phone number.

I can foresee worse examples happening in the future if google is not careful.
 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2023 by Finax

[Danioover9000]

@Finax

52 minutes ago, Finax said:

@aurum I don’t think so. Googles decision to immediately ban an innocent from all their photos, emails, files, and phone number without evidence is not correct like you suggest. 

Even if they bring the accounts back, the damage was already done, and it can be more damaging then you might of thought to a persons life. Think about it.
 

Sending innocent photos to a doctor should not warrant an aggressive ban in the first place. Patient doctor confidentially matters, what happens when a lawyer asks his client to send photos that might be illegal, the lawyer will not report to the police, but Googles ability to intercept those photos goes against the idea of confidentiality, especially when Google does not know the context of the photo. Privacy matters.

 

Child porn is serious, but child nudity is different. It should be taken seriously regardless, but a innocent who was following doctors orders should not have led to ban on his accounts including his emails and phone number.

I can foresee worse examples happening in the future if google is not careful.
 

 

 

   I agree, although I have very little context going into this situation regarding Google's banning of Dad sending son's penis picture to doctor. If it's under medical confidentiality, and patient to doctor relationship, then sorry Google you're in the wrong specifically for this, but in other contexts  google is correct for overreaction of child nudity. I also disagree how Google may have profiled this person just from potential criminal records, that in this specific issue the police found him innocent for, so descrimination, or slander is potential lawsuit that the Dad could pursue.

   And shame on you all users who read my anecdote and only complaining of the cut and the nudity image. Of course I screwed up in the comparison, but ya'll stuck in the content of the comparison, but not look for the STRUCTURE of WHAT I'M SAYING, look past what I've written, see the underlying issue...also Stop bullying me in my DMs please, you know who you are, now stop. Funny then but now it's annoying.

Edited March 11, 2023 by Danioover9000

[aurum]

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

My point, is is it justified that Google did this when it's a confidential patient-doctor relationship?

Yes.

The whole problem is that Google does not know what these photos are being used for. Therefore it must act as if there could be an issue.

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

what I disagree is them not unbanning until now which is years still, and whether it's a medical confidential setting that the image was being used under

Well that I agree with. I’ve been saying throughout this whole thread. I would like to see Google rectify their error.

48 minutes ago, Finax said:

Googles decision to immediately ban an innocent from all their photos, emails, files, and phone number without evidence is not correct like you suggest. 

 

See my response above to Dani. Google must act without evidence because it doesn’t know ahead of time this person is innocent. It cannot just assume this person is a caring parent taking their kid to the doctor.

[Danioover9000]

@aurum

4 minutes ago, aurum said:

Yes.

The whole problem is that Google does not know what these photos are being used for. Therefore it must act as if there could be an issue.

Well that I agree with. I’ve been saying throughout this whole thread. I would like to see Google rectify their error.

See my response above to Dani. Google must act without evidence because it doesn’t know ahead of time this person is innocent. It cannot just assume this person is a caring parent taking their kid to the doctor.

   What if they did know exactly what those images were used for though? If they knew that the Dad sent them under medical confidentiality reasons, and Google knows that, does it still justify them for banning the image knowing what they were used for? This my key issue here, unless they didn't know, in which case the Dad has legal right to take Google to court. In fact, I think he has to to rectify his account, and make them apologies for their mistake. After all, the context was potential child porn why would Google willingly rectify and apologies first?

[aurum]

6 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

If they knew that the Dad sent them under medical confidentiality reasons, and Google knows that, does it still justify them for banning the image knowing what they were used for?

If the images are still being hosted with Google, then IMO yes.

Google uses PhotoDNA to track for this kind of thing. It’s just an algorithm. It not sophisticated enough at this point to know your human intentions.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/photodna

6 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

the Dad has legal right to take Google to court. In fact, I think he has to to rectify his account, and make them apologies for their mistake.

He can certainly do that if he wants. I don’t know how much of a legal case he has though. He’d have to talk with a lawyer. My unprofessional guess is the case would be pretty weak, but maybe he could still get paid some damages.

[Danioover9000]

@aurum

12 minutes ago, aurum said:

If the images are still being hosted with Google, then IMO yes.

Google uses PhotoDNA to track for this kind of thing. It’s just an algorithm. It not sophisticated enough at this point to know your human intentions.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/photodna

He can certainly do that if he wants. I don’t know how much of a legal case he has though. He’d have to talk with a lawyer. My unprofessional guess is the case would be pretty weak, but maybe he could still get paid some damages.

   @Finax  Then I guess the next question, if your google account is banned or terminated, what are your alternatives then? What are alternative accounts other than Google to make?

[caspex]

12 hours ago, Finax said:

Child porn is serious, but child nudity is different. It should be taken seriously regardless, but a innocent who was following doctors orders should not have led to ban on his accounts including his emails and phone number.

I can foresee worse examples happening in the future if google is not careful.

I agree that Google should unban the man but the initial ban was justified. It's problematic that Google isn't unbanning the man, I wonder if the situation has been correctly communicated to the people in charge inside Google.

[Leo Gura]

This is one of those grey-area moderation issues that plagues every social platform, including this forum.

It's hard to make 100% perfect mod decisions. Accuracy is time-consuming and gives asymptotic diminishing returns.

Edited March 12, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This is one of those grey-area moderation issues that plagues every social platform, including this forum.

It's hard to make 100% perfect mod decisions. Accuracy is time-consuming and gives asymptotic diminishing returns.

  Side tangent, every time you post or make a new video, you always end up using a few exotic English words, that's nice.

   I agree, because of Google's scale of billions, that there's statistical likelihood of 100,000 or 10,000 getting a mod mistake. It sucks especially if those people rely on google accounts for their work.

[Leo Gura]

Every major social platform needs to implement an appeals process. There needs to be a landing page specifically in case you think there has been a moderation mistake. And then a committee reviews it. This would also be good for the companies from a PR perspective. People would get a lot less pissy at these companies. Honestly, I'm surprised these companies have not made such landing pages just for PR purposes.

Edited March 12, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Danioover9000]

@Swarnim

8 hours ago, Swarnim said:

I agree that Google should unban the man but the initial ban was justified. It's problematic that Google isn't unbanning the man, I wonder if the situation has been correctly communicated to the people in charge inside Google.

   There could be miscommunication for sure. I think in this case both the police and Google should have worked and communicated together, especially after banning him, like within a month.

   This situation has me a bit worried, because I draw various subject matters, in comic or manga styles, and some of those images are saved in my google account. Gonna be considering moving them in a more secure folder or something.

[caspex]

5 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Swarnim

   There could be miscommunication for sure. I think in this case both the police and Google should have worked and communicated together, especially after banning him, like within a month.

   This situation has me a bit worried, because I draw various subject matters, in comic or manga styles, and some of those images are saved in my google account. Gonna be considering moving them in a more secure folder or something.

@Danioover9000 You shouldn't rely completely on one company for your digital needs in the first place. I keep my files locally in hard drives or flash drives in addition to cloud storage options. I don't have a lot to store but if I ever needed to store massive amount of data I'd get a NAS device.

I even want to get my own email server going after a few years because I don't want to rely on any google, Microsoft or other services.