"In statements made by investigators, the video was apparently "recovered from residual data located in backend systems." It's unclear how long such data is retained or how easy it is for Google to access it. Some reports claim that it took several days for Google to recover the data. In large-scale enterprise storage solutions, "deleted" for the user doesn't always mean that the data is gone."
"That's something a company like Google could decide to do on its own, or it could be compelled to perform the recovery by a court order. In the Guthrie case, it sounds like Google was voluntarily cooperating with the investigation, which makes sense. Publishing video of the alleged perpetrator could be a major breakthrough as investigators seek help from the public."
"After all, this video expired after three hours, but here it is nine days later. That feels a bit suspicious on the surface, particularly for a company that is so focused on training AI models that feed on video. We have previously asked Google to explain how it uses Nest to train AI models, and the company claims it does not incorporate user videos into training data,"
Cloud-stored videos that expire for users can persist in backend systems as residual data and may be recoverable days later. Large-scale enterprise storage often compresses and overwrites unused data only as needed, leaving recoverable copies until overwritten. A provider can recover such residual data voluntarily or be compelled by court order. In at least one case Google appears to have cooperated and recovered video that had expired for the user. The presence of recovered expired video raises privacy concerns given corporate AI research priorities and policies that allow using user interactions and video-related metadata to train models.
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]