zlacker

>>walz+(OP)
How many of these people didn't understand that anyone could see their videos?

It might be a bit difficult for the highly technical HN crowd to grasp how little many people understand technology. Not changing the title is already a big clue. Since it was a feature built-in to a native app, people might have thought their videos would not be public or only shared with friends, and lots of them might not even have understood what they were doing at all.

>>Netcob+3v
This is my take too. This is more like finding an unsecured s3 bucket and delving through it.

It might have been "published" to YouTube, but was it really done so with informed consent?

This is unlikely to be a popular opinion here, but mass downloading of IMG_0001 videos is essentially trawling for private data by looking for an identifier of accidentally unsecured private data, akin to searching for "{ apiKey: " in github.

>>xnorsw+iU
"Share to Youtube" should at least make the video Unlisted by default which is probably what most people expect: They get to share the url with their friends/family, but you can't find their videos in search. And the security model makes sense: anyone with the url can view it.

Public by default is just so bad.

Youtube playlists used to default to public and it's ridiculous to realize some personal playlist you've been accumulating is right there on your profile. I think they finally fixed it.

Facebook also bungled massively in this space where just commenting on some embarrassing Facebook group ended up broadcasting it to all of your friends' walls. And you had no way of knowing that until one of your friends told you that your question on "Foreskin restoration support group" showed up on their wall.

You're probably in the top 1% of product/UX designers if you spend just 10 seconds pondering the level of privacy the average user expects as they do things in an app.