Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Subject: Urgent Warning”

daniel.haxx.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 184 posts

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#81

Post by hotgoldminer »

madaxe_again wrote: post #24

Ah, this sort of thing is as old as the moon. We run an eCommerce platform, have a variety of clients using it, they have a number of customers. At least once a week we get an accusation either from a client or an end-user of some outlandish nefarious behaviour, usually due to some complete lack of understanding of the nature of technology. Way back when, we responded, tried to help, tried to explain, but it tends to…

In my mind this is the best advice - the only I would follow. Don't respond to the raving and incensed. Instead let them pursue remedy with the relevant authority. Then state your case to said authority. All will circle back to the original party, and they'll buy the explanation: authority granted not only because they're the established authority but also because they were independently engaged by the original party.

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#82

Post by logicallee »

Sorry, it's pretty ridiculous that the author chose to write all that and engage in correspondence without mentioning the elephant in the room either to the photographer, or to the reader (us) in this write-up. The elephant in the room is that haxx.se is a tongue-in-cheek name (or a coincidence.)

Would it have killed him to mention this?

"Dear Photographer Lady: I run a very well-regarded library, you may have had this reaction because I have the tongue-in-cheek name haxx.se [alternatively: because of the coincident name haxx], however I am a well-paid consultant similar to yourself and other than this choice of domain name there is nothing alarming. The library is famous and you should see a similar notice in all of your friend's phones (or anyone else's you check). It is in use by major corporations including Apple and Spotify. Sorry about the confusion."

that's literally all this is about. (obviously.)

In fact, it makes me seriously question the author's good faith that he ends with the call-to-action "I’ve tried to respond with calm and clear reasonable logic and technical details on why she’s seeing my name there. That clearly failed. What do I try next?" without mentioning the elephant in the room.

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#83

Post by Johnwbh »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #51
JoshTriplett wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyway. When you have a conversation with an idiot, nobody watching can tell which one of you is the idiot. A friend of mine who works as a college professor has a fun approach to deal with the kinds of random cranks who contact him out of the blue seeking someone to validate their wild Time-Cube-style theories and "research": he responds to each one by providing an introduction to the previous one. Apparently, he…

This idea terrifies me even more than it amuses me. The notion of the long-term influence that could be gained by a network of cooperating Time-Cube-style theorists is enough to give me nightmares.

Most people like that really just need someone to talk to, so introducing them to eachother solves both their issues neatly

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#86

Post by mrweasel »

centizen wrote: post #2

Honestly, I wouldn't even respond. I would imagine any response you give is going to be twisted as your original ones have been. You've tried to be reasonable, and you don't owe her anything - don't engage her any further.

I think that's the right solution. This is a person with a problem, and now she found a real person to contact. Like it or not responding will just verify her idea that he's now in charge of fixing her problem.

Companies like Instagram, Facebook, Google and others make it hard to get in contact with a real person, but so users start hunting for a way in. In this case an Instagram user think she found a way in.

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#87

Post by overgard »

xlayn wrote: post #30
madaxe_again wrote: post #24

Ah, this sort of thing is as old as the moon. We run an eCommerce platform, have a variety of clients using it, they have a number of customers. At least once a week we get an accusation either from a client or an end-user of some outlandish nefarious behaviour, usually due to some complete lack of understanding of the nature of technology. Way back when, we responded, tried to help, tried to explain, but it tends to…

"When you have a conversation with an idiot, nobody watching can tell which one of you is the idiot". They are not idiots, they are average people, tech is complex, I wonder if people who have to be told or explain things to represent a market to attend? Imagine, something were you call a number ask for something to be bought; later someone go picking up the money, you perform the purchase and you later deliver. No c…

> They are not idiots,

They ARE idiots, but not because they don't know tech. They're idiots making strong accusations without having any idea what they're talking about or any evidence.

People finding scapegoats because they're afraid of the unknown is how we historically ended up with things like the witch trials.

Naiveté is fine, not everyone can know everything, but this sort of aggressive ignorance shouldn't be even remotely humored.

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#88

Post by mbubb »

vxxzy wrote: post #4

If you desire to respond, I would relate the topic to her field. She claims to be a photographer. Surely she has a vague idea of copyright law. I would explain that you had developed a piece of Intellectual Property and licensed said property in a specific form -akin to taking a photograph. The person who takes a photograph owns the copyright. It just so happens that Spotify and Instagram, "enjoy your work" and have…

Exactly - I was thinking about cars. If you have a problem with the brake system you don't call Delco (who used to make those indash radios years ago) because that logo is visible and staring you in the face.

... Although there probably is a cartalk episode that would prove me wrong on this assumption

Website might not be quite as complex as an auto but close and a decent analogy as there are different subsystems...

Re: “Subject: Urgent Warning”

#90

Post by beachstartup »

cptskippy wrote: post #85

I think the proper response is something along the lines of "did Michelin Tires hack your car?"

this requires interpretation and analysis of an analogy, something most people are terrible at (back when i took the SAT this section was a source of frustration among my peers - i suspect all high scorers had a knack for it).
Post reply on HN