Loomio

Tagging people in photos

DU
[deactivated account] Public Seen by 148

Hi all, my first post here.
I talked about photos in general in the development Google group but I would like to focus here on tagging people (contacts) in individual photos in Diaspora. I'm surprised this subject hasn't come up (from what I could find) - I think photos are basically what drives social networks, and tagging encourages people to share and comment on them. To make Diaspora truly social it is a must IMHO. Currently many people upload artistic photos but not so much of their friends, vacations, etc. For anyone coming from Facebook, even if he is aware of its big shortcomings, the lack of this feature will be very noticeable and may be a "deal breaker". I'm not a dev myself (I do have some website admin and setup experience) but I would like to see this being added, maybe even given a high priority. What do you think?

MM

Marek Marecki Wed 29 Jan 2014

I'm really sorry for bombing you. Excuse me, but for me such feature is a major threat to users' privacy.

If it's added there must exist a strong shielding that would allow users to protect themselves from being tagged. For example: tagging should not be applied to photo unless the user gives theirs consent to it.

  1. Ann wants to tag Bob in the "Photo".
  2. Bob gets notification that Ann wants to tag him.
  3. Bob can either accept or reject the request.
  4. If he rejects it, tagging information is immediately dropped.

Consent must be given before any person-tagging federation mechanisms kick in to prevent spread of unwanted information.

Also, there must exists a shield that would automatically reject tag-requests.

DU

[deactivated account] Wed 29 Jan 2014

@marekmarecki no problems :)
I agree such authorization mechanism should be implemented, as long as it is simple simple enough from the user's POV (it is the way you described it).

If the user want to there should be an option to disable him from being tagged by others altogether. He should still be able to tag himself though.
In such case when someone tries to tag him that person should receive a message clarifying that he cannot be tagged.

DU

[deactivated account] Wed 29 Jan 2014

Thinking about it further, we should have under privacy settings something similar to this:

Allow contacts to tag me in photos?
1. Yes [default? IMHO yes for simplicity but it is debatable]
2. After I authorize
3. No

Of course the user should have the option to remove his tag from photos at any time.

But maybe we are a getting a little ahead of ourselves since tagging should be worked on first.

G

goob Wed 29 Jan 2014

Currently many people upload artistic photos but not so much of their friends, vacations, etc.

Or it may be (more likely) that users only post photos of a personal nature to one or more of their friends, and only post less personal photos publicly, so that it is these less personal photos which get reshared, and which you see in your stream.

I absolutely agree with what Marek says. Any potential privacy leak must be plugged if such a feature were to be introduced. I also don't see it as a very important feature of a social network. Certainly not a deal-breaker.

It is of course already possible to 'tag' people by @-mentioning them in the post to which a photo is attached. There is an existing privacy issue there, which is not currently addressed.

F

Faldrian Wed 29 Jan 2014

My first reaction to this suggestion was "Oh no... nonono... not this feature, which is a major feature of Diaspora that it DOES NOT exist."

I really like the ideas behind Diaspora, it comes pre-configured in paranoia-mode to let you decide what information you want to share with the world. It may be a feature users from Facebook learned to like, but it's a very big step towards building pressure on users. Imagine users saying "oh, I can't tag you... please enable it, I want to tag you, so the photo from our team meeting is 100% face-tagged, I like it to be complete.".
I can imagine people that are like that... and with the lack of this feature, it's not even possible.

On the other hand... Diaspora is a Do-It-Yourself community. It's quite easy to grab your GIMP or Inkscape and just put Names on the photo and mention the Diaspora-Accounts below the picture.

Just my thoughts on that... :)

DU

[deactivated account] Thu 30 Jan 2014

First I totally agree that privacy in tagging should be dealt with smartly with options as we discussed.

I would like to say something more generally - if we want people to come to Diaspora (I do) and see it as a real alternative we should consider what matters to the "general public" in social networks and not just think about what's important to to us as individuals, and implement what can be implemented while maintaining Diaspora's values. Arguably, many will not stick to Diaspora because they can't tag their friends in photos - ask your Facebook friends what is their opinion. As I said in the Google group (is there anyone there? lol) currently Diaspora is a very nice "gicky" experiment. if you don't see it just check the trending tags in any large pod, and you will see tags tags like "opensource" and "linux" dominating. It's not bad in itself but to me it says that in general people don't see Diaspora as a place to communicate with friends regarding their daily lives the same way they do on Facebook (maybe it's just the tags in public posts, but I think it represents private posts too). I hope to see it changing, and expanding the photo functionality is important for this.

SP

Sebas Pedersen Thu 30 Jan 2014

I see tagging as a feature very close realted to privacy... and my first thought is bad. If I see photo and recognize people great, if I don't why should I be given their names/profiles for free?
In respect to attract people to Diaspoa*, personally one of the reasons that made me come to Diaspora* is that of an general understanding/agreement on the philosphy. I don't think being a lot is the issue, I think being that the ones should be is the main key idea... I mean, ok Facebook has that feature so a lot of people goes to Facebook... well I simply don't want a lot of people who has no interest in privacy, descentralized, freedom, etc. come to Diaspora*.

Just a comment! :)

(and sorry abou my english)

DU

[deactivated account] Thu 30 Jan 2014

A suggestion that may solve nicely the privacy issue: Only show tagged profiles of people which are your in contacts.

well I simply don’t want a lot of people who has no interest in privacy, descentralized, freedom, etc. come to Diaspora*.

So not many will come to diaspora, and with about 10% of my friends (maybe) there, there will be no point for me to use it. Currently it IS a social network for geeks (I'm a geek too) and it's not even my definition. This how diaspora looks to someone less tech oriented.

It is better to build a great social network and say: here's diaspora, it does the important things you care about in a social network, but it does them in a privacy aware fashion! (and it's non commercial, etc etc). And I believe tagging contacts in photos will help to bring life to diaspora.

SP

Sebas Pedersen Fri 31 Jan 2014

I see your point @itai ... hope you see mine too.

A suggestion that may solve nicely the privacy issue: Only show tagged profiles of people which are your in contacts.

I don't know, still make me noise in matters of privacy... if it is your contact then you know who he/she is.

So not many will come to diaspora, and with about 10% of my friends (maybe) there, there will be no point for me to use it. Currently it IS a social network for geeks (I’m a geek too) and it’s not even my definition. This how diaspora looks to someone less tech oriented.

I do agree it's currently a geeks network, but I have my doubts about trying to get people in by imitating features in other social nertworks... maybe have our own ones and attract people for other reasons? Even philosophical or ethical ones...
Any way, I do see your point about not reaching a significan part of your friends, althou as I say before I don't want to give even a chance to undermine the current basis of Diaspora (privacy, non-comercial, decentralized, etc.) in pos to attract people.

I do also believe that tagging contacts in photos will help to bring life to Diaspora, but also believe that a new feature goal should not be that, in fact it should be a secondary effect, Privacy and alike should be imperative in a discussion of a new feature, and if its help people to join D* then much better!

I also much agree with @Goob:

Any potential privacy leak must be plugged if such a feature were to be introduced. I also don’t see it as a very important feature of a social network. Certainly not a deal-breaker.

It is of course already possible to ‘tag’ people by @-mentioning them in the post to which a photo is attached. There is an existing privacy issue there, which is not currently addressed.

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 31 Jan 2014

@sebaspedersen , it seems we agree that tagging people in photos will help to bring people to diaspora, and make it more ‘alive’ with personal communication.
I don’t see this feature as Facebook imitation but as an important part of any social network, just like private messages for example - here I believe we see things differently, and it’s perfectly fine.

if it is your contact then you know who he/she is.

Yes of course, you will recognize his face even without the tagging :) But tagging will be used to a contact’s attention to a photo of him (notification), and to allow everyone to easily search for photos they appear in.

So to sum after everyone’s input so far, my suggestion is as follows:

  1. We should be able to tag our contacts in individual photos.
  2. In photos we will only see tagged profiles of people if they are contacts of us.
  3. There will an option to restrict being tagged by others: always, after individual permission, or never.

Do you think this suggestion is OK with regrading to privacy?

SP

Sebas Pedersen Sat 1 Feb 2014

@itai Yes, I do see your suggestion as an intermediate and feasible position. Although I must say that the possibility of being tagged by others should be disable by default, and that is a point I consider central and very important, and not just a matter of policy of use.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Sat 1 Feb 2014

I don't think that we need that feature but here is an idea to solve the privacy issue if anyone would like to implement it:

When implementing this feature we have to deal with "bad pods" which could allow tagging users without their permission. Therefore users should only be able to tag themselves in photos. They are able to add a tag but there is no way to associate another user with that tag so the only user that is associated with that tag is the user who added it.

We could allow contacts to send a "message" to a user and ask him to tag himself on a photo. We could even implement a feature "automatically add a tag if a contact suggests it" but IMO it should be always the user who tags himself.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 2 Feb 2014

When implementing this feature we have to deal with “bad pods” which could allow tagging users without their permission. Therefore users should only be able to tag themselves in photos.

@steffenvanbergerem, I don't understand - if allowing to be tagged by others is a user setting how is the pod relevant?

We could allow contacts to send a “message” to a user and ask him to tag himself on a photo.

That's the option to be tagged by others after own authorization :)

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Sun 2 Feb 2014

@itai This is an important implementation detail. When you are able to tag a contact in a photo then you can modify your pod's code to do that without the contact's permission. When you are just able to add a tag but not to add an associated user to that tag then you are the only user who could be associated with that tag.

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 3 Feb 2014

@steffenvanbergerem, If I you understood correctly:
1. My suggesion: User A "tags" user B in a photo. User B set his options to be tagged only after authorization, he sees the photo and authorizes, so he is tagged in the photo.
2. Your suggestion: User A "tags" user B in a photo. User B receives a special 'message' to tag himself, and does so.

Security and privacy wise these seem the same to to me, except that in option 2 user B needs a few more clicks to actually tag himself, instead of just clicking 'authorize'. If someone goes the length of changing the code to tag users without authorization he could also do it option 2.
And one could just send a private message and ask someone to tag himself.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Mon 3 Feb 2014

@itai As I said this is an (important) implementation detail. In both cases the user experience could be basically the same. The "special message" shouldn't be a regular private message. It could be something like a notification and when the user agrees he is automatically tagged in the photo. Like I said this is just about who is able to tag someone. I'll try to explain that:

option 1:
User A: asks for authorization
User B: accepts
User A: adds tag

option 2:
User A: asks user B to tag himself
User B: tags himself (automatically)

When choosing option 2 we don't have to implement any authorization process and we don't have to think about how to prevent User A from tagging User B without his permission.

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 3 Feb 2014

OK I understand, so user experience for user B would be the same - no need to manually tag from his perspective, just 'authorize'. Sounds good to me.

DU

[deactivated account] started a proposal Sun 9 Feb 2014

Tagging ourselves in photos, and allowing contacts to ask us to be tagged Closed Wed 19 Feb 2014

Outcome
by [deactivated account] Tue 25 Apr 2017

Tagging people in photos shall not be implemented as suggested here. Since the majority which turned it down is not very big, I may make a revised proposal based on further input. Thank you for the feedback.

So after everyone's input my suggestion is as follows:
1. We will be able to tag ourselves in photos uploaded by us, or uploaded by others and visible to us.
2. Our contacts will be able to send us a special request to tag ourselves in photos visible to both of us. When "accepting" this request, we will become tagged in that photo (i.e tagging would be still initiated from our side for privacy reasons).
3. In photos we will only see tagged people if they are contacts of us.
4. There will a user option to disable tagging requests from others (off by default).

Agree - 10
Abstain - 10
Disagree - 10
Block - 10
33 people have voted (20%)
DU

[deactivated account]
Agree
Sun 9 Feb 2014

N

NicoAlto
Agree
Sun 9 Feb 2014

DU

[deactivated account]
Abstain
Sun 9 Feb 2014

Point # 3 is critical in this proposal.

D

dremodaris
Agree
Mon 10 Feb 2014

Seems low priority though...

SM

Seth Martin
Abstain
Mon 10 Feb 2014

If it weren't for points 3 and 4, this would be a no vote. I think photo tagging is annoying. I don't like photo tagging at all, but if someone wants to waste their time developing, I'm not stopping them unless it affects us without our consent.

R

Ryuno-Ki
Disagree
Mon 10 Feb 2014

Strongly against it.

There's no need to integrate it in diaspora*.
If people like, they should use a specialised service for doing so.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem
Abstain
Tue 11 Feb 2014

As I said before I don't think this is a necessary feature but I won't stop anyone from implementing it.

G

goob
Abstain
Tue 11 Feb 2014

Tagging photos is an awful, invasive feature from FB and I really wouldn't want it in D*. However, if potential privacy leaks were locked down, I would not block it. Otherwise, my vote is NO.

G

goob
Abstain
Tue 11 Feb 2014

Tagging photos is an awful, invasive feature from FB and I really wouldn't want it in D*. However, if potential privacy leaks were locked down, I would not block it. Otherwise, my vote is NO. In any case, it wouldn't get priority.

MŁ

Maciek Łoziński
Agree
Tue 11 Feb 2014

JR

Jason Robinson
Agree
Tue 11 Feb 2014

DU

[deactivated account]
Agree
Tue 11 Feb 2014

Many positive aspects for social, few negatives

CG

Christian Giménez
Disagree
Wed 12 Feb 2014

I think this is unnecesary, because we can already @ mention whoever we want when making a post (and uploading a photo) with all the privacy politics we already have.

Also, all devs must be very careful about privacy when coding this: so difficult

ME

Michael Engelhardt
Abstain
Thu 13 Feb 2014

Personally I see no need for that kind of feature but I wouldn't mind if if it will be implemented privacy aware. Maybe it will help to attract more user...

DB

Dee Baumdeesaster
Disagree
Thu 13 Feb 2014

DB

Dee Baumdeesaster
Disagree
Thu 13 Feb 2014

we're not on facebook and tagging is very annoying.

G

goob
Disagree
Thu 13 Feb 2014

Changing my vote. Tagging photos is an awful, invasive feature from FB and I really wouldn't want it in D*. We have @-mentions in D* if someone wants to 'tag' someone else. Let's leave it at that and not introduce some other, unnecessary system.

V

Vostok
Agree
Thu 13 Feb 2014

Thinking about the diaspora* success by implementing such feature instead of telling you my personal preferences, and considering the user privacy will be granted by well implemented 2, 3 and 4, I consider this could be a good feature.

SP

Sebas Pedersen
Abstain
Fri 14 Feb 2014

As I said, I don't like that much the idea, althougt I do understand others positions. With privacy on very top, I wouldn't mind having this feature.

SP

Sebas Pedersen
Disagree
Fri 14 Feb 2014

I'm gonna change my vote. I do understand those who see this feature as important, but the @mention feature, the fact that if you see someone you know in a photo then "no reason" to tagg him/her, and above all the privacy "leak" makes me say no.

KAK

Karthikeyan A K
Agree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

W

Waithamai
Disagree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

no no no no no.

H

hewiak
Abstain
Sun 16 Feb 2014

non-photo-taggers like myself are left wondering if the implementation effort would be worth it

D

dremodaris
Abstain
Sun 16 Feb 2014

Seems low priority though...
Edit: changed from agree to abstain - Sebas P. has a strong argument.

S

SuperTux88
Abstain
Sun 16 Feb 2014

T

theradialactive
Disagree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

CK

Christos Koulaxizis
Agree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

A

Adrenalin
Block
Sun 16 Feb 2014

Strongly against implementing this. I never used personal pictures of myself and will not tolerate if others try to upload my pic and -even worse tag it with my name.
Period and end of discussion for me.

TS

Trolli Schmittlauch
Agree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

The proposed solution is good regarding privacy, so why not? I think people who think of tagging as offensive should be able to disable that feature/the notifications.

S

StarBlessed
Block
Sun 16 Feb 2014

Epic and resounding NO.

MP

Mike Powell
Disagree
Sun 16 Feb 2014

R

rhaglion
Abstain
Tue 18 Feb 2014

It's not must to have but also nothing bad.

R

rhaglion
Abstain
Tue 18 Feb 2014

It's not must to have but also nothing to bad.

FS

Florian Staudacher
Disagree
Tue 18 Feb 2014

I am not convinced this scheme is thought-out in respect to public and limited posts/photos.
Also, I simply personally dislike tagging people on photos

F

Faldrian
Disagree
Tue 18 Feb 2014

F

Flaburgan
Abstain
Wed 19 Feb 2014

The argument was, we need that to see more communication between diaspora user. IMO, be able to recommend friends, photo albums, xmpp chat... are way more important than tagging in photos to solve this problem.

RS-

Robin Stent - Outreach
Disagree
Wed 19 Feb 2014

Although I think this is a good idea I have voted against because I think it needs a detailed proposal as to how it would work. Perhaps you could take on board some of the comments and come back with a new more detailed proposal.

MM

Marek Marecki
Abstain
Wed 19 Feb 2014

I'm rather reluctant to see such functionality being implemented in D*.

MM

Marek Marecki
Disagree
Wed 19 Feb 2014

I'm rather reluctant to see such functionality being implemented in D*.

MM

Marek Marecki
Abstain
Wed 19 Feb 2014

I'm rather reluctant to see such functionality being implemented in D*.

N

Nick
Agree
Wed 19 Feb 2014

There is an option within this proposal for users to totally disallow themselves to be tagged - so I'm not sure why some of the previous people have such as a strong objection to this being something other users can allow?

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 9 Feb 2014

I created a proposal which summarizes this good discussion to see where we stand and if there is a general will to implement this feature (IMHO it's important for a social network , as I mentioned earlier).

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Sun 9 Feb 2014

  1. In photos we will only see tagged people if they are contacts of us.

Is there any reason for that? Why don't we just use the privacy options the post/photo gives us? (Everyone who is allowed to see the photo would be allowed to see the tagged people)

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 9 Feb 2014

Is there any reason for that? Why don’t we just use the privacy options the post/photo gives us? (Everyone who is allowed to see the photo would be allowed to see the tagged people).

Because not everyone who can see the photo may be contacts of those who are tagged, and this is to prevent "profile leaking" which is important to some.

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 10 Feb 2014

I think photo tagging is annoying. I don't like photo tagging at all

@sethmartin, In contrast I think photo tagging is important to diaspora. Care to explain why you find it annoying? Do you upload photos of friends? It is a very convenient feature.

R

Ryuno-Ki Mon 10 Feb 2014

I have no Facebook friends to ask … since I have no account there any more.

But just in case one would tag me on a photo, I'd demand him or her to remove it from the web. I do not want any photo of me in the web (except I upload it on my own … displaying only one person). So what do you suggest in this case?

Here in Germany, the law grants the citizens a "right on the own picture".

Hence I upload only photos showing things. Who knows, what "bad guys" could do with my photo a few years from now?

DU

[deactivated account] Tue 11 Feb 2014

But just in case one would tag me on a photo, I’d demand him or her to remove it from the web. I do not want any photo of me in the web

That is your right of course. However do you understand that according to this proposal you would not be tagged without your permission?

CG

Christian Giménez Wed 12 Feb 2014

I want to ask something: if lots of privacy issues has to be addressed, how this will be explained to non-geek people?

We want to atract people, but we have to explain them the reasons behind all this. Its nice to say "you can 'tag' your friend", but we have to explain the privacy issue there:
"But just people you want, also people they want, also people who you have as contact, also people who you have at the aspect, also..."

I think it may be much to explain, maybe difficult... Remember, we have to make them easy as well and ensure that privacy is our maximum, our primary objective. We don't want to let them think we don't have "control" about that.

I use the @-mention to call the attention to the people involved in a photograph. Is more simple and respect the aspect privacy feature.

C

Christophe Thu 13 Feb 2014

It's pointless to discuss features if there's nobody to implement them.

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 14 Feb 2014

@sebaspedersen and others - using mentions instead of tags is actually worse for privacy because people can mention and so associate you with a photo without the control of parts 2,3, and 4 here. Best for privacy would actually be to disable mentioning for photos or limit it in a similar way to the proposal... With that said, if there was an option to mention people in individual photos rather than in posts, it would answer the need of this proposal as far as I'm concerned (I don't mind that much about people associating me with photos, obviously many of you are more sensitive to that which is why I suggested 2-4).

G

goob Sun 16 Feb 2014

Itai, you may be right, and the privacy implications of @-mentioning in photos perhaps has to be discussed separately. But the answer to that problem is surely not to add a new way to tag people in photos! We already have a way (mentions) of 'tagging' someone - if we're going to use anything, let's use that and tie up any privacy leaks present in the current system of mentions.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

Goob, I generally agree. As I said, if there was a way to @ mention people in individual photos it would answer the need of this proposal.
Currently mentions only work for posts which may group several unrelated photos, we can’t mention people in photos published by somebody else (in comments), and we can’t mention ourselves at all, even in our posts. So this system is not really suitable for tagging contacts and ourselves in photos.

G

goob Sun 16 Feb 2014

That's true, but there are discussions on organising photos (we recently agreed to use #tags to organise photos), and about enabling mentions in comments.

In my opinion, the way to approach this would be to work on using the existing #tags and @-mentions in diaspora* to cover this instance. That is, organising photos through use of #tags so that they can be viewed outside the context of a particular post, and extending @-mentions so that (a) they can be used in comments, and perhaps also (b) so that they can be used as a means of mentioning ('tagging') people in photos, within the privacy guidelines you mention above.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

I like to idea of using mentions for tagging contacts in photos (if it is expanded as you describe). Still it's not without issues: for example how to differentiate mentioning of someone who is actually in the photo from mentioning meant to get someone's attention to the discussion about a photo (in its comments). I think it is an implementation detail however, and as the proposal doesn't specify exactly how it should be implemented, there is no contradiction.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Sun 16 Feb 2014

@adrenalin Please read the proposal carefully. Uploading photos is possible right now and this proposal won't change anything about it. The proposal also says that YOU should be able to tag YOURSELF on a photo. You won't be able to tag anyone but yourself. The only thing your contacts are able to do is to send you a private message and ask you to tag yourself on a photo. Again: you are the onyl one to decide if you would like to tag yourself on a photo.

A

Adrenalin Sun 16 Feb 2014

@steffenvanbergerem

photo tagging of other users annoys me, getting tagging requests I am forced to deal with are annoying too. Having this implemented in the general profile settings with default "no" will lead to confusion (remember the nsf-tag??) . And implementing that feature is a waist of time as long as we have lots of more important stuff to get done.

My 2 cents. So still strongly against this, not only a simple "no" sorry.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem Sun 16 Feb 2014

@adrenalin That's fine. It's your decision. Just wanted to make sure that your decision is based on valid reasons which it is like you pointed out in your answer.

TS

Trolli Schmittlauch Sun 16 Feb 2014

@adrenalin I understand that people may be annoyed by those requests so people need to be able to disable tagging for their account or at least disable those notifications. And about the "waste of time" argument: Diaspora* is currently a kind of DOocracy- so if there's someone willing to implement this feature after a successful proposal it wil be done, if nobody wants to do it it wouldn't be.

Imho blocking is a quite strong vote and you should reconsider it. Nevertheless, I accept your vote.

A

Adrenalin Sun 16 Feb 2014

@trollischmittlauch I won't leave d* if it gets implemented :)) . I used the "blocking" instead of the simple "no" to show I really strongly disagree on the feature and there won't be anything to convince me about how desperately needed a photo-tagging feature is. I did/ do not want to block the discussion or implementation. It just means I am out of this topic as my final (strong) decision is permanent.

JR

Jason Robinson Sun 16 Feb 2014

The vote is kind of moot anyway since AFAIK no one plans to implement the feature any time soon? :) Should we extend the vote since it seems to be very finely cut to each side? Allow more discussion etc.

A

Adrenalin Sun 16 Feb 2014

well we have a result? 9:7+1 so 9Yay 8Nay or does "blocking count double :))

Ohh please take your time to find someone willing to work on implementing it. :P

JR

Jason Robinson Sun 16 Feb 2014

Blocking is just a strong no. We decided that when we started using Loomio :)

A

Adrenalin Sun 16 Feb 2014

:))

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

There are good arguments for each side. I still believe it is an important feature, yet I understand without someone willing to implement it it's not very relevant (as I see most developers here wouldn't want it). Since the discussion is ongoing and we're divided I'm extending the closing date by three days. After that if needed I will make a revised proposal and see if we can better agree.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

BTW I think the current proposal answers all privacy concerns so privacy alone should not be a reason to vote it down. Please address specific issues (not everyone did it).

S

StarBlessed Sun 16 Feb 2014

@itai I didn't address any specific issue, because I figured it was not a requirement for voting.

Personally, I would never EVER want to see photo's tagged on D*. The ONLY time it would ever be even remotely of value, is if it was for your own personal reference only.

Everyone seems to forget that it would only take a single nefarious entity to start a Pod. Then they would have access to practically all relationships between accounts.

This is just another way to trace relationships. Epic privacy fail.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

@starblessed those with concerns similar to yours - which I honestly understand - could simply not tag themselves and disable requests. Then it would is just like photo tagging doesn't exist in d* at all for them. I said earlier that we should think about what is important in a social network to many and implement it while maintaining d* values and privacy. Honestly I think it is a little selfish to prevent a popular feature when it can be disabled individuality. There are privacy concerns with almost any action in a social network, but it should remain social. My 2c.

S

StarBlessed Sun 16 Feb 2014

@itai - Perhaps, but you're missing the point. D* is about privacy and freedom. It is not about creating as many links as possible so that it can open up the system to possible data mining. We want to minimize the problem, not create more ways people can be traced.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

Please explain how it would be possible for someone unwanted to use photo tagging as suggested here to link person A to person B, when he will not be able to see person A tagged in a photo unless person A he added him (the unwanted guy) to an aspect. And please if you don’t trust your contacts or the podmin (which can see everything) then don’t use d* in the first place.

S

StarBlessed Sun 16 Feb 2014

I AM a Podmin.

For your proposal to work, every tag on every picture would have to be distributed to every pod where a tagged user is located.

As a Podmin, you can see almost all of this data without too much hassle.

As I stated in my original post, it wouldn't take much for a person/group to create a pod with a few users, and gather all this data. A few connections later and they would have a small but growing connection map.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

While what you're saying could be true (I'm not expert on d* security), it is the same for any action a user makes in d*. You're basically saying forget about the privacy measures of d*, there is rouge pod and he knows everything. The only with solution with this approach would be not use it...

S

StarBlessed Sun 16 Feb 2014

Call it what you will. I've cast my vote.

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 16 Feb 2014

No problems, I wanted to understand better.

DU

[deactivated account] Sat 22 Feb 2014

I've been thinking about a simpler and more private way to do that and would like to hear your opinion, especially of those who voted no. Basically, the idea is to use the @ mentioning system for photo tagging as was suggested here, and that only you could mention yourself in a photo (no requests etc). This mentioning will be visible to just yourself or to selected aspects, if you choose to do so.
At its base this feature could be by one (privately) just for keeping track of photos he appears in.
A proposed UI is attached.

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 24 Feb 2014

Any other comments? :) Or should we vote on this?

FS

Florian Staudacher Mon 24 Feb 2014

not sure how much value we'd get from that variant.
would that be possible on all photos or just your own?
what if I wanted to misuse the feature to annoy other people by tagging arbitrary images?

G

goob Mon 24 Feb 2014

If you were going to have a feature like that, the person who uploaded the photo would have to authorise the 'mention', otherwise people would spam mentions of themselves on many photos, as Florian points out.

I just don't like photo 'tagging', I'm afraid. I really dislike it in social networks that have it, and wouldn't be keen to see it in Diaspora. I know I mentioned 'mentions' before, but I wasn't suggesting we should extend mentions to have a 'tagging' function; I was rather saying 'we already have mentions, let's not have tagging'.

I think we should consider what are the best possible features to have in a different type of social network, rather than merely aping the rubbish features of established networks. I don't think tagging people in photos is one of the best things about social networks, and therefore I don't think we should copy it. There are better things we can do to make Diaspora an attractive network to join and use. Let's dare to be different!

DU

[deactivated account] Mon 24 Feb 2014

@goob , I for sure don't see photo tagging as a rubbish feature that we only need because Facebook has it, but as something vital to a social network (I said that a few times). I understand your view but I guess we can agree to disagree here.

@florianstaudacher , about spamming or misuse which Goob mentioned too. This should not be different than other forms of spamming (e,g commenting on many posts) and can be dealt accordingly by podmins.

My intention was to allow users to mention themselves in any photo visible to them.

Those who don't like tagging could just use this feature to keep track of photos they appear in, or not at all.

R

Rob Wed 8 Oct 2014

Boy I'm late to this party, but this conversation was kind of a bummer to read through. I'm not personally that into photo tagging either, but I recognize that a lot of people do like it, and it does have a lot of social value for those people. Seems like there's a good amount of self-sabotaging going on in this community by over-reacting to privacy worries and shutting down the conversation instead of trying to find a better way forward. Why is it hard to understand that some people DO like to be tagged and some people DON'T? Are individual privacy controls really not an option?

Most of the "no" votes seem to come with reasons like "I personally don't like it" or "It will be too difficult to do right". Both sound like awful reasons to shut the conversation down right out of the gate. This discussion should have gone on for months, not days.

No, the goal is not to be facebook (powerful features that invade your privacy) but the goal is also not just to be the anti-facebook (weak features that respect your privacy). The real goal should be trying to build the powerful features without the evil stuff. Very difficult, yes, but isn't that the whole point of this project??

I came here because of openness, and I'm finding closed minds.

But again, I'm new here, so somebody set me straight...

S

StefOfficiel Wed 8 Oct 2014

I hate to be tagged on the photos ... But I understand that people are interested. I think it is more or less the same style of debate for smileys ! If there is an option to disable and prevent others from tagged me in a photo, I do not see what the problem is !

Excuse me, but for me such feature is a major threat to users' privacy.

Be tagged in a photo or cited in the commentary to the photo, to me it's almost the same thing ... Being on a social network is to be confronted with the risk of spreading his private life. I am of the same opinion, I do not absolutely love someone other than me talking about my private life. But sometimes it can be an important and practical for various reasons.