21–30 of 52 posts
In case you were wondering how it works, this library is a rack middleware wrapper around this JavaScript: var annotated = window.location.href.indexOf("genius.it/") != -1; if (annotated) { window.location.href = window.location.href.replace("genius.it/", "") }
https://github.com/vijithassar/genius-defender
Unlike the others (which prevent hosting on genius.it) this one actually prevents annotations via plugin etc by injecting invisible characters at random. Its a WP plugin but the method could be adapted.
Unsure if there are SEO/other implications.
More info: http://www.vijithassar.com/2641/how-to-block-genius-annotati...
To me a big motivation is to keep control of the content on your page. Also, isn't it a copyright violation?
NewsGenius needs to at least 1) identify their crawler, and 2) provide a way to opt-out. Otherwise, it doesn't look good for them. They're not being a very good citizen of the Web.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Odd, I don't see the link there. But anyway, reading Ms. Dawson's post does make me seriously reconsider the ethical motivations for making this tool. I suppose my initial negative reaction was more based on the 'platonic ideal of a universal web annotation layer' as gkop puts it, rather than an actual understanding of how the Genius platform operates. Here's another article with additional context: http://www.vox.co…
First, there's been tools like this for a while. MS had an annotations tool built into IE in the 90s. (Though I think it required some sort of Office server or something.) Second, her reasoning seems to revolve around not having comments on her site. Isn't this literally what every link aggregator from HN to reddit does? She mentions reddit and others, but doesn't explain how they're different. Apparently it's becaus…
Things like this don't become a problem until it is so easily organized. A bunch of tweets, FB posts, HN, reddit or other social comments are so scattered they don't have as much impact. The comments aren't visible on the the same page as the content.
I'm going to have to think more about this. I've had this thought a couple of times now but I don't have a full picture of it yet.
Typically this would mean browser add-ons and extensions, but I wouldn't be surprised to discover other things (like headers injected by cellular companies, or who knows what from malware infections).
Such a tool would be useful when troubleshooting various 'works on my machine' scenarios.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Odd, I don't see the link there. But anyway, reading Ms. Dawson's post does make me seriously reconsider the ethical motivations for making this tool. I suppose my initial negative reaction was more based on the 'platonic ideal of a universal web annotation layer' as gkop puts it, rather than an actual understanding of how the Genius platform operates. Here's another article with additional context: http://www.vox.co…
Thanks for the link. The protestations are a little silly from what I gather. So this is the crux of it: Genius allows people to comment on stuff that people write - like an improved comment section. Occasionally these comments suck and are offensive. From the blog post: "News Genius adds one more way for people on the Internet to be made unsafe." and "A tool that allows my abusive ex-boyfriend to interact with me an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Odd, I don't see the link there. But anyway, reading Ms. Dawson's post does make me seriously reconsider the ethical motivations for making this tool. I suppose my initial negative reaction was more based on the 'platonic ideal of a universal web annotation layer' as gkop puts it, rather than an actual understanding of how the Genius platform operates. Here's another article with additional context: http://www.vox.co…
Thanks for the link. The protestations are a little silly from what I gather. So this is the crux of it: Genius allows people to comment on stuff that people write - like an improved comment section. Occasionally these comments suck and are offensive. From the blog post: "News Genius adds one more way for people on the Internet to be made unsafe." and "A tool that allows my abusive ex-boyfriend to interact with me an…
From our tech-centric perspectives, the value of a universal annotation platform seems self evident, but for a layman's perspective, it just seems like another toxic commenting layer that content creators can't moderate (which, in the ideal, it is). The fact that it's then collocated with their content, instead of, say, a click away on HN or twitter, makes it feel more violating.
The truly ideal platform would have massive adoption with benevolent power users that both prevented abuse and generated value adding content by verifying factual claims, adding appropriate context, etc. This ideal use case is pretty far from Genius's original platform (explaining rap lyrics in an entertaining fashion), and that mismatch of intents seems to be the source of the problem.
I guess they will argue fair use, but hostile 'annotations' definitely reduce the value of the work, they reuse the entire work, and they use the work for commercial gain. I wouldn't consider this a slam dunk.
I actually really dislike this concept of "we're going to wrap your website and mark it up with other stuff to make it look like you're hosting this content here". Sure, people should be able to talk wherever they want, but keep that in a popup, or at worst a frame - don't highlight text to suggest that the author has done that, and don't load your own elements in their page.
I wrote some javascript you can stick on your page that blocks all attempts for genius to inject shit into your DOM. https://github.com/toddself/genius-blocker
Thanks for sharing. The gem works in a similar way, with a small JS script.