It's weird as fuck how people working in these fields have unrestricted access to peoples private information, be it videos, pictures or worse.
Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models.
If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.
If it isn't end-to-end encrypted, then the platform operator has access.
>regardless of privacy
Maybe you should read the TOS before you use services, you don't have any of that.
A general rule is people don't know shit when it comes to legal definitions. When you have a video it's private to you. When you give that video to a friend it's 'private' between both of you. And when you put a private video on youtube it's 'private' between you and the conglomerate entity of hundreds of thousands of people and all their contractors called Google.
Now the contractor did break the rule and shared it, but your idea of private as no one will see it is the broken expectation.
There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it. That sort of defeatist mindset is super counterproductive, and ends up putting more people in harm's way.
We're talking about people choosing to upload unencrypted content to a cloud service that is obviously publicly available. The security/privacy properties of this action I think should be obvious even to less technical users.
> There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it
> Sysadmins are also people.
is it your contention that the sysadmins at those organizations don't care about computer security? Or that users are responsible for knowing whether their organizations' sysadmins care about computer security?