Sex Workers Say Porn On Google Drive Is Suddenly Disappearing (vice.com) 356
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Porn performer Avey Moon was trying to send the lucky winner of her Chaturbate contest his prize -- one of her videos, titled "POV Blowjob" -- through her Google Drive account. But it wouldn't send, and Google wasn't telling her why. "I thought there was something wrong with my file and I got rather worried," Moon told me in a Twitter message. "I had promised this guy his content and he was so good to me. I was panicked because I thought if I couldn't give him his prize, he would feel like he got ripped off and never come back again or worse, he could actually file a complaint with Chaturbate about me and they can take money from me." She's not alone. Six porn performers I talked to and more on social media said that they suddenly can't download adult content they keep on Google Drive. They also said they can't a share that content with other accounts or send to clients. In some cases, the adult content is disappearing from Drive without warning or explanation. The porn performers I talked to started sounding the alarm on Twitter last week. They said that Google Drive no longer seemed sex-trade friendly, detailing error messages and sharing cloud storage alternatives with each other.
When I asked about sexual content being blocked on Drive, a spokesperson for Google directed me to the Drive policy page -- specifically the section on sexually explicit material, which says, "Do not publish sexually explicit or pornographic images or videos.... Additionally, we do not allow content that drives traffic to commercial pornography." Writing about porn and sex is permitted, the policy states, as long as it's not accompanied by sexually explicit images or videos. According to Google, Drive uses a combination of automated systems and manual review to decide what's in violation. One worker said they've been using Google Drive for most of the last five and a half years but just recently received an error message when sending a video, saying that the item may violate Google's Terms of Service, with a link to request a review. In this case, the video title was explicit, but other adult performers report similar messages when sending content with non-explicit titles. "Some sex workers are wondering if this has something to do with the impending vote on the SESTA-FOSTA bill," reports Motherboard. We now have learned that the Senate has passed the bill.
When I asked about sexual content being blocked on Drive, a spokesperson for Google directed me to the Drive policy page -- specifically the section on sexually explicit material, which says, "Do not publish sexually explicit or pornographic images or videos.... Additionally, we do not allow content that drives traffic to commercial pornography." Writing about porn and sex is permitted, the policy states, as long as it's not accompanied by sexually explicit images or videos. According to Google, Drive uses a combination of automated systems and manual review to decide what's in violation. One worker said they've been using Google Drive for most of the last five and a half years but just recently received an error message when sending a video, saying that the item may violate Google's Terms of Service, with a link to request a review. In this case, the video title was explicit, but other adult performers report similar messages when sending content with non-explicit titles. "Some sex workers are wondering if this has something to do with the impending vote on the SESTA-FOSTA bill," reports Motherboard. We now have learned that the Senate has passed the bill.
Not just sex workers, any explicitly named images (Score:5, Informative)
I follow a few cosplay people on Twitter, and some have been saying that even files that have no nudity but just filenames that contain explicit terms, are being locked such that they cannot be accessed nor downloaded.
Some people were storing their ONLY copy of an image on Google Drive, for the cosplayers these may represent the results of expensive photoshoots they paid for...
I never really got into using Google Drive and I'm pretty thankful I never did. It is absurd that any file you uploaded may suddenly be seized such that you will never see it again.
Re:Not just sex workers, any explicitly named imag (Score:5, Insightful)
There's the problem. Don't store your only copy of expensive data on Someone Else's Computer aka The Cloud(tm). At least have a local backup.
If it's on someone else's computer, they can impose their rules, laws, and religious superstitions on you.
Re:Not just sex workers, any explicitly named imag (Score:5, Informative)
There's the problem. Don't store your only copy of expensive data on Someone Else's Computer aka The Cloud(tm). At least have a local backup.
It’s irrelevant whether we’re talking about something controversial, or photos from your kid’s christening - it’s simply stupid to keep your only copy on a cloud drive. You’ve got to have at least one backup that’s under your own control. More than one is even better.
Re: (Score:3)
Backup is only backup if you have it in three different locations, in at least two different formats. Cloud is only one format. Hard Drive (local), CD/DVD, Tape, are all other formats. Everything else is something less than backup. And backups are a bitch to manage, because formats become unusable. Who has a 8 inch floppy drive I can borrow?
Re: Not just sex workers, any explicitly named ima (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I guess if you really want to use a cloud service such as google drive, you'll want to use an app that encrypts and changes to numeric filenames.
Thank you, I came here to say this. ^^
Is Google going to forbid uploading/downloading encrypted (by a non-Google encryption algorithm they have no keys for) numerically-named files on GD now?
It's time for Alphabet and Twitter/FB to go quietly into that good night. They are enemies of individual liberty.
Strat
Re: (Score:3)
Between projects like IPFS and Sia, I suspect Drive will be under pressure for cost alone.
I wouldn't be surprised if the US government passed laws, Acts, or regulations to make those illegal if they began to receive serious adoption numbers among the US population, both to protect the politician's owners (Google, etc) and to make certain people have no way to securely communicate that government can't decrypt and read. To their way of thinking, livestock has no need for privacy or security, after all.
Hell, there's yet *another* article here on /. about the government again insisting on backdoors
Re: (Score:3)
I guess if you really want to use a cloud service such as google drive, you'll want to use an app that encrypts and changes to numeric filenames.
I can see the headlines now: "Tech Site Solves Dirty Download Dillemma, Advises Pornographers to Zip It Up"
Re:Not just sex workers, any explicitly named imag (Score:5, Informative)
If Google support won't budge, then I would suggest they file a lawsuit against Google then, and settle the matter in court.
Google's rule about "Do not publish sexually explicit or pornographic images or videos" --- doesn't say ANYTHING against using their storage service for Private, Non-Published storage of files and selective distribution or sharing between team members.
Re: Not just sex workers, any explicitly named ima (Score:3)
Because it's safer than walking next to them?
Or maybe because some people really care about good art and cosplay is excellent art.
One LARP group in Britain had to close down because too many members were hired by film studios to work on costuming.
These days, nobody more conservative (Score:2, Interesting)
than the Left...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because thier motto was always "leave people alone."
It never was. It never, ever was. It was always "those people are different from us, let's get 'em!" Or of course, it has also been "those people aren't really people, so it's okay to enslave them".
do not trust the cloud (Score:5, Informative)
And this is exactly why people should not trust the cloud.
'The cloud' is a fancy way of saying, "somebody else's computer". And they can control what stays on their computer. They control what security (if any) is in place to protect your data.
These services and companies can not be trusted.
Re: (Score:3)
Nice to see the sysadmin role will be coming back into vogue soon.
Re: (Score:3)
You get what you pay for? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not clear whether or not those accounts are the free accounts, or if they are paid for.
I switched from Drive to Dropbox a while ago. I wasn't cool with having a fair amount of important data locked up in a 'free' solution that could be turned off at any time. I'd rather pay the couple of dollars a month for Dropbox.
Re:You get what you pay for? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because you pay for it doesn't mean it won't disappear or be subject to content 'shadow bans.'
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not so worried about shadow bans of my spread sheets and family photos.
If they start banning VeraCrypt containers, then I've got a real problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's next, if those running these companies wish to push their political agendas strongly enough. You should be concerned about shadow deletes of any content on the service.
Re: (Score:2)
It's only a matter of time before they try and ban animated ASCII art.
Re:You get what you pay for? (Score:5, Insightful)
And it might happen. After all, they can't tell what your encrypted content is--it could be anything. Maybe they'll decide they just better play it safe...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Generally, if you get something for free, you have no basis for a lawsuit.
I'm not aware of companies taking things away from their customers without being sued. Do you have any evidence this is a thing?
Re: (Score:2)
subject to whatever's in the TOS though, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, you have no basis, whatsoever, if you're using a free service. Basic law 101: consideration [law.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you pay for it doesn't mean it won't disappear or be subject to content 'shadow bans.'
No it doesn't, but paying for something does form a stronger legal contract between two parties which makes it far easier to win a court case.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a bin full of 1TB USB 3.0 drives.
As naïve as this might sound, I have a lot more peace of mind in Dropbox. If I experience a drive failure, I lose what is on there. They have SANs.
TBH, I am saving up for a 4 drive Synology NAS. With 4TB @ RAID5 I will get 12TB of storage. That's more than enough for what I am backing up.
Re: (Score:2)
The issue with google is political (and possibly legal) not technological.
Re: (Score:2)
The big, immediate issue with Google is political. Doesn't mean there aren't any possible technical issues If you think Google Drive is 100% bulletproof, you're fooling yourself, because nothing is 100% bulletproof. Especially not anything offered for free.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh believe me, I don't think they're foolproof and I'm well aware of their political shenanigans.
Re: (Score:2)
I figure the chances of three drives failing simultaneously are pretty slim. It's not like they're all Western Digital. Only one of them is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both are needed; the cloud is a quick and dirty offsite backup. When a house or apartment burns down / floods / is sucked into oz by a tornado, there's no time to take the SAN, especially if no one is home when it happens.
Sneakernet-ing a hard drive swap to a safe deposit box gets old after a while... and knowing my luck the guy one box over will be storing his rare earth magnet collection in there.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You get what you pay for? (Score:5, Informative)
SpiderOak offers End-to-end encyption and Zero-Knowledge Encryption too.
Other V word (Score:5, Informative)
This story reveals a violation of assumptions I had made about Google(TM)'s handling of my data
This story reveals a VALIDATION of assumptions I had made about Google's handling of my data. Which is why I try not to let Google have anything I care about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this. This story reveals a violation of assumptions I had made about Googleâ(TM)s handling of my data
Really? Their terms of service say that anything you upload or store in their service belongs to them. Did you build your assumptions based off of what they wrote down they would do?
Re: (Score:2)
> Really? Their terms of service say that anything you upload or store in their service belongs to them.
Gogle is careful _not_ to assume ownership of Google Drive content. See the actual terms of use at: https://support.google.com/dri... [google.com]
There are many business and legal reasons for Google to avoid claiming ownership of that content. One of the simpler reasons is to avoid responsibility for it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you need cloud hosting... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you need cloud hosting, go with a non-US provider. The US is gradually reverting to a pit of Puritanism and religious zealotry. More evolved societies only worry about what can actually harm people (i.e. terrorist recruitment material), not about the naked human body.
Seems like violence and gunplay is fine in US media and TV shows, but the moment you see one-fifth of an areola, the Puritans get up in arms.
Re: (Score:3)
It was the Puritans who started the war on Christmas (or any European festivals). It's thanks to the raucous and irreverent waves of immigrants who arrived later that people in the USA are allowed to celebrate and enjoy themselves.
I wonder if Google are also blocking images from art and literature that show the naked human form?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's radical leftist feminists who are pushing for porn censorship these days because it "promotes sexual violence" and "objectifies women." The whole religious right puritan push died decades ago.
I wonder if you even live here.
Re:If you need cloud hosting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That's true. Ideologues come in many forms spouting many doctrines.
The difference is the left (Score:2)
Now to be fair those evangelicals meeting Trump are mostly just charlatans. But there again is the difference between the left and
Re:The difference is the left (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. They're in charge at Google.
Re: (Score:2)
"Sad is the man whose pleasures depend on the permission of another." -- A wise person
Re:If you need cloud hosting... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's radical leftist feminists who are pushing for porn censorship these days
Yes, they're currently the bigger enemy of free speech, but the religious kind has never stopped. We're being hit from both sides.
Re: (Score:2)
At the same time, I'm meeting more women than ever who are into porn, both consumption and production.
I do live in Portland, Oregon though so my sample population is likely skewed from the 'norm' for America.
Yeah, "more evolved societies" my ass (Score:3)
Like the UK which is about to send a comedian to prison for teaching his joke Nazi jokes or France where Le Pen is about to be prosecuted for sharing pictures of what ISIS does to remind me people to oppose any measure that lets jihad into France?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First they came for... (Score:5, Insightful)
Encryption (Score:2)
I wonder if you can store encrypted files on Drive? If so just email the key to the person you share it with.
Re: (Score:3)
And lo and behold here's the easy way to do it. https://arstechnica.com/inform... [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder if you can store encrypted files on Drive? If so just email the key to the person you share it with.
You forgot the important step of naming the encrypted videos
CuteFluffyKitten00x
What's new? (Score:2)
Legit surprised it lasted this long (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd been of the understanding for a long time that Google Drive didn't want adult content on its service. As the title states: I'm genuinely surprised people had been successfully using Google Drive in such a fashion for such a long time by what appears to be a lot of people.
Ah well, there are alternatives at least. I feel like it would have been nice to tell users about exactly why their content is no longer allowed, but that's far too much for a consumer peon to ask from a faceless & soulless corporate golem.
Bonus: while typing out that last sentence the word golem flags my spell checker as being incorrect. The word "golem" has the spell check autocorrect suggestion of Google. I'm using Chrome. Irony levels are over 9000.
First they banned (Score:5, Insightful)
Then they banned gun owners [slashdot.org], and I did not speak out because I was not a gun owner.
Then they banned porn [slashdot.org], and I did not speak out because I did not distribute porn.
Then then banned me, and there was no one left to speak for me.
This is why if you believe in freedom of speech, you have to protect even speech you find reprehensible. If you do not, you are giving the morality police control over what speech is allowed. Reprehensible speech should be deemed reprehensible because people have viewed or listened to it and deemed it reprehensible. Not because someone in a position of power in government or some company has deemed it reprehensible and prevented the public from viewing or hearing it.
Google enforces policy (Score:2, Troll)
Non story. See the subject line.
Re: (Score:2)
All part of the hazards of storing your data on servers you don't own.
Get a clue- zip your files with a password (Score:2, Interesting)
Excellent google proof file compressors are FREE and LEGAL and trivial to install and use.
7-zip. Grown up software with constant updates and source code if you want it. Not this pre-packaged, corporate approved shit from apple, microsoft of google stores.
If you use the software (apps) that come with your OS, you're a fucking cretin. Worse, you help turn the world to shit.
The most fantastic thing about the computer revolution is that it is a people's revolution. The computer empowers everyone who cares to ma
PMRC Senate Hearing 1985 (Score:2)
It was Tipper Gore who started it.
And Dee Snider, Frank Zappa and John Denver who ended it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
So encrypt it (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're going to store anything in " The Cloud ", encrypt the file prior to upload and change the name to something that doesn't make it obvious as to what the file may contain.
IE: Insane Blowjob while smeared in Green Jello -> Cat Video #3
This really should be common sense by now.
It's not YOUR drive (Score:2)
You guys just noticed GDrive blocking stuff now?!! (Score:2)
I guess it took porn for people to notice that Google blocks file they deem unacceptable. Google have been blocking .exe, .com, .bat and other extensions for years, even if you change the extension. You have to encrypt the files.
Re: (Score:2)
That's to prevent people from spreading malware around. That's reasonable.
And some people would say porn is worse than malware. The point is Google has always been blocking content and yet people are only getting upset about it now. I don’t see how .bat could spread malware though. Made running old DOS games on an old system a pain when I can’t just have a friend send over his .bat. Of course, this was like a decade ago.
Kill the only value.... (Score:2)
The ONLY values of using cloud services over an encrypted USB drive on your keychain is the always there/always reliable/easily shared point.
I also enjoy the auto-cloud sync when taking pictured on my mobile. I guess I'm only allowed to photo "approved" things now eh?
This move kills every single cloud use case I can come up with.
Good thing thumbdrives have become such popular promo items. My cloud is on my keys.
TOS (Score:5, Insightful)
So technically she was in violation of GDrive TOS for 5 and a half years then.
I'm no friend of Google snooping in your data that you entrusted them with, but with the threat of criminal prosecution for NOT doing it, I can't blame them for following the laws.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Religion? Google's Religion is Money (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Religion? Google's Religion is Money (Score:5, Informative)
No offense, but are you stupid? Here is something the (Republican) governor of Utah and the (Republican) legislature of Utah did just a few years ago. In case your intellectual disability precludes you from being able to click on a link, Utah was the first state to pass laws declaring pornography a public health hazard.
http://www.newsweek.com/utah-p... [newsweek.com]
Re: (Score:3)
No offense, but are you stupid? Here is something the (Republican) governor of Utah and the (Republican) legislature of Utah did just a few years ago. In case your intellectual disability precludes you from being able to click on a link, Utah was the first state to pass laws declaring pornography a public health hazard.
http://www.newsweek.com/utah-p... [newsweek.com]
Remember, Republicans like the forbidden nature of Pr0n.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No dude, your point was that "Porn has nothing to worry about from the Right". But the fact is, people who are going after pornography are almost exclusively on the Right. Feminist opposition to pornography has been steadily shrinking since the 1970s. Now you will find that most feminists' only concerns about pornography is that
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Absolutely wrong the main resistance to pornography is now coming from the hard left feminists. You are misinformed.
Let us now compare influence on society: hard left feminists vs. conservative politicians.
Re: Religion? Google's Religion is Money (Score:5, Informative)
No sir. Did you know, for example, that the 2016 Republican Party platform, which was formed at the RNC convention that nominated Donald Trump declared pornography a pubic health hazard?
Here is the language from the official party platform:
https://prod-cdn-static.gop.co... [gop.com]
The Democratic Party, which as we know is controlled by the radical feminists, had no such language.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Republicans think porn is pretty dangerous.
https://www.gq.com/story/flori... [gq.com]
Then again I heard someone claim Theresa May is a communist the other day so who knows what left and right mean any more.
Re:Religion? Google's Religion is Money (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't put too much stock in hashtags. #KillHarvey is fake, for example.
Bullshit (Score:2)
Yes, the left would like women to stop being objectified. _Any_ humanist should want that. Humans are not objects and should not be treated as such. Why isn't there mo
Re: Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it's about moral busybodies inflicting their whims on others as a power trip... And no side has a monopoly on that. Third wave feminists, social justice fanatics, Google/Twitter, evangelicals, Republicans, etc... All of them desperately want to tell me who I can be, what I can say, who I can fuck, what I can read, what I can see, and so on.
This is why the Constitution and Bill of Rights are so critically important to uphold. It isn't just old paper. It's an enumeration of our freedom and protections, wh
Re:Religion? Google's Religion is Money (Score:4, Informative)
Porn has nothing to worry about from the Right
So how do you explain the 114 Republicans who voted for FOSTA [congress.gov]?
FOSTA makes websites responsible for misuse by users, so one set of nudes that turns out to be a prostitute advertising makes the website owners into felons. FOSTA does nothing to the people actually committing the crimes, either, as it's sole purpose is to take away the section 230 protections that website owners had up until now.
The House passed FOSTA a few weeks ago and the Senate passed it four days ago. It's not a coincidence that Google started taking down anything that might be pornographic before Trump signs it and it becomes law.
So tell us again why porn sites have nothing to fear from the right.
Re:Fuck Google (Score:5, Interesting)
This is actually a good way to get doctors to stop using the service.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Google warned them, so what's the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
While I would agree mostly, that if you dont like a TOS go somewhere else, but google and apple phones use their own services.
Microsoft apps want to backup to microsoft drive. Google apps want to backup to gdrive. Apple to idrive. You get the idea.
It's very dishonest when a company owns a majority of a market like android phones, combines services then tries to tell you how to use it.
If they didn't like LGBT and started removing your LGBT apps would that be an issue? How about your hunting pictures, your state legal pot, your protest photos?
Damn slippery slope for the Internet generation. These companies are basically public services, if you own A PC, A MAC or a Android device, they are a defacto monopoly to their platform. You wouldn't want your ISP to block you, your Telecom to block you, your Power company to block you, why would you want your storage device to block you, your email app to block you, your social media site to block you, your free speech goes all along those lines.
Stallman was only partially correct, its not copyright that will be used to control you, its the Terms of Service.
Demand a free and open internet, free speech, free use, no censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
ISP's should be a public service.
Whatever else you're blathering on about "free speech" doesn't really make any sense.
Re:Google warned them, so what's the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
In Denmark there is a system called NemID (EasyID, if you want to translate it) which is used for ALL COMMUNICATION with the authorities, banks, etc.
And as of 2018 they're phasing out the physical one-time pads in favor of a smart phone app. I assure you, using a smart phone is something Danish citizens are very soon FORCED to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody is being forced to use a "smart phone" or a "free" Google or Apple service.
I assure you, using a smart phone is something Danish citizens are very soon FORCED to do.
Even when you're not forced to do it, not having a smartphone with internet access makes you a second-class citizen. So many functions are faster and easier on a cellphone than any other way, anyone who doesn't have one is now effectively penalized. You can get away with only using it on wifi in a lot of places, but not having one at all? Bananas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Google warned them, so what's the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Damn slippery slope for the Internet generation.
What really makes me sad is how many of the younger generation in the USA are perfectly ok with censorship, as long as the people censored are the ones they dislike. This seems to happen more and more, in universities, in public forums, in social media.
I used to live in one of the former Iron Curtain countries, and freedom of speech was something we could only dream of. After the fall of communism, being able to speak one's mind in public was pure joy. I can't believe people born with the right to free speech can be so dismissive of it.
Re:Lucky winner of Chaturbate contest (Score:5, Funny)
Is this what slashdot is reduced to, giving free advertising to some wank site?
Slashdot's motto has always been: "Nudes for Nerds!"
Re:What the fuck is a "sex worker"? (Score:5, Informative)
Someone who has sex for their job.
Like a construction worker does construction for their job.
How stupid can you be?
Re: (Score:2)
No lawsuits, they're enforcing terms already agreed to. Terms that have been in place for many years.
Re: (Score:2)
Since at least 30/09/2014
https://web.archive.org/web/20... [archive.org]