Same. After the NYT articles (and several others from other news agencies), I stopped using Google for storage of personal files as I no longer trust their AI. Private (technically they call them personal) files should not be analyzed, unless there is a very high level of necessity. Scanning around the clock should not be done, just like we don’t need cameras in every home because bad things happen in homes. I also get that people will say make backups and that the cloud is optional. But an email address itself can be vital and is unable to be backed up (as far as I’m aware you can only back up the emails themselves). I doubt they are doing any better than if they just reported accounts at random. I mean reporting millions of accounts a year will probably catch some bad actors. And that they lock you out of all other data and won’t give your account back even after you are proven innocent is beyond insane. I don’t necessarily even think that emails should be scanned either. I get anything that is (or is about to be) made public needs to be scrutinized. Just my two cents.
Edit: Google claims humans are in the reviewing the accounts, but you also have to ask what conditions those people are under. Are they highly trained? Are they looking at the worst of the worst every day? Are they pressured to just follow the recommendations of the AI? Or are they just trusting the AI and rubber stamping the results? Do they just pass the buck? I don’t think the current system was ever ment to handle the volume of accusations spurred on by AI. Google and Meta are at the forefront, but it’s the NCMEC that is the one really pushing for more volume.
Same. After the NYT articles (and several others from other news agencies), I stopped using Google for storage of personal files as I no longer trust their AI. Private (technically they call them personal) files should not be analyzed, unless there is a very high level of necessity. Scanning around the clock should not be done, just like we don’t need cameras in every home because bad things happen in homes. I also get that people will say make backups and that the cloud is optional. But an email address itself can be vital and is unable to be backed up (as far as I’m aware you can only back up the emails themselves). I doubt they are doing any better than if they just reported accounts at random. I mean reporting millions of accounts a year will probably catch some bad actors. And that they lock you out of all other data and won’t give your account back even after you are proven innocent is beyond insane. I don’t necessarily even think that emails should be scanned either. I get anything that is (or is about to be) made public needs to be scrutinized. Just my two cents.
Edit: Google claims humans are in the reviewing the accounts, but you also have to ask what conditions those people are under. Are they highly trained? Are they looking at the worst of the worst every day? Are they pressured to just follow the recommendations of the AI? Or are they just trusting the AI and rubber stamping the results? Do they just pass the buck? I don’t think the current system was ever ment to handle the volume of accusations spurred on by AI. Google and Meta are at the forefront, but it’s the NCMEC that is the one really pushing for more volume.