Live data from Hacker News

Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

fusion.net

311–320 of 457 posts

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#311
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have a problem because Facebook and Gmail are huge, and because people are starting to assume the convenience and size of them somehow means Facebook and Gmail should be considered public services and regulated as such. While I see the same problem you do- that we're all at risk of losing the correspondence and history that we care about, man do I think your reaction is super weird. Facebook and Gmail are priva…

To be fair, Facebook and Google profit from this misunderstanding. I do see your point, but I don't feel they should be able to advertise themselves, effectively, as utilities and then refuse to carry the burden of that claim. If Google says you'll be able to store their email with them in perpetuity, one of two things should be true: either they should be legally treated as a utility, or they should be taken to cour…

Are they falsely advertising, pretending to be public utilities? And is that what's going on - people actually being tricked and thinking they're public services?

To be honest, I can't say I've ever seen an ad for Facebook or Gmail. They entered my world like I imagine most people -- because I heard about them from friends.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#312
post #237
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP addresses are meant to be addresses ; if you move your address around everyone else has to update their routing tables. To do what you want you probably want to get your own AS Number and actually participate in routing (BGP etc). I've heard of quite small businesses doing that, but not individuals.

I was looking to do this, but it was just too hard. I believe you need to have a company / association of some kind with a VAT number to get registered. The closest I have found is going with the IPv6 tunnels from someone like Hurricane Electric, but speed is a bit limited.

It's a lot easier than you might think to set up a company and get a VAT number (I'm a contractor so have done that already), though it does cost some money (IIRC something like 40 quid).

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#313

From Reddit: "I've read a few of Cooper's books and the short answer is yes, pedophilia is a common theme in his writing (as is incest and necrophilia)." [1] I'm calling it now. It was child porn. Google doesn't like to go around deleting people's stuff. When this has happened in the past it's been child porn, which Google is obligated by governments everywhere to delete with extreme prejudice. And of course they're…

your guess sounds reasonable... however:

if its true, its an issue for law enforcement to address, not you or I

if its false, you've just smeared a man's name out in a public and effectively permanent forum.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#314
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have a problem because Facebook and Gmail are huge, and because people are starting to assume the convenience and size of them somehow means Facebook and Gmail should be considered public services and regulated as such. While I see the same problem you do- that we're all at risk of losing the correspondence and history that we care about, man do I think your reaction is super weird. Facebook and Gmail are priva…

To be fair, Facebook and Google profit from this misunderstanding. I do see your point, but I don't feel they should be able to advertise themselves, effectively, as utilities and then refuse to carry the burden of that claim. If Google says you'll be able to store their email with them in perpetuity, one of two things should be true: either they should be legally treated as a utility, or they should be taken to cour…

I don't think there's any "effective" advertising as utilities. Where do they say you can store email with them in perpetuity?

One of the biggest problems, I think, is user education: the average user sees these widely-adopted services online and assumes they're equivalent to meatspace, where real utilities have been created over time by institutions -- not private corporations. If anything, we need a legally enforceable way to set up true virtual utilities, or for more people to internalize what the media has been telling anyone who listens carefully for years: your data, once handed over, no longer belongs to you.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#316
post #250

There is a legal definition of child pornography: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2256 Did his work fit this definition? I doubt it, because he would have been in jail by now, given that he never concealed his name. Also Google is notorious for heavy handed treatment of smaller AdSense publishers, which makes me doubly sceptical. http://www.webpronews.com/another-publisher-goes-after-googl...

Who cares anyway, algorithmically full time surveillance of the public basically castrates pedophiles, limiting them to fiction.

So the usual will happen, public shaming of the "artist" into some pseudo-religious organization, where he/she/it can be forced by the "believers" to uphold some the marriage/basic-income-for-beauty Contract. Another horrific social machine from the past.

Could we at least pressure potentially creative persons into something socially useful? He/She/It who makes the biggest scientific contribution of a group of three, gets a good life and "surveilanced" freedom, the median gets publicly outed and "surveilanced" freedom, the least contributing goes to some prison. Repeat every year.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data resided on Google's servers -- their property. Read the terms and conditions you agree to, Google doesn't owe you anything. > If it was art that borders on distasteful to some > then google is deciding taste and public values with > private algorithms. But that's well within their right to do. If you don't like it, there's an easy solution: don't use Google. This behavior is well-known (remember Google Reade…

> the fact that so many people are upset is indicative of the growing technological entitlement mentality A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually all of their products. > You can get a 3 Terabyte backup drive today on Amazon The first words you see when you visit https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for all your files". > there are alternatives to using a hosting company Like what? Deeply techn…

Surely the line "a safe place for your files" is only saying that it's secure from hackers and they won't be deleted by mistake. It says nothing of them being deleted if they're against Google's terms. Similarly Amazon's marketing of a 3 terabyte backup drive - the use of the word backup implies that you shouldn't rely on it as the only copy of your files. It's not a backup if there's only one copy.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Writing about incest, necrophilia, sex with children; these are not child pornography. Neither are artistic renderings about such subjects. In the US and a few other countries, yes, images where no real person other than the artist was involved is classified as Child Pornography. It's disgusting and squarely in the realm of thought crime, but no one cares because once you think of the children you can do almost any…

The US law that did that that was struck down as unconstitutional more than 14 years ago, so the "is classified" claim is false. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/16/national/16CND-PORN.html

Wrong Law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley

That law currently stands.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#319

From Reddit: "I've read a few of Cooper's books and the short answer is yes, pedophilia is a common theme in his writing (as is incest and necrophilia)." [1] I'm calling it now. It was child porn. Google doesn't like to go around deleting people's stuff. When this has happened in the past it's been child porn, which Google is obligated by governments everywhere to delete with extreme prejudice. And of course they're…

Childporn seems to be the trigger here, but this is only the tip of the iceberg. This story illustrates a huge problem facing nearly all social media re child pornography. The laws seem like bright line, but in reality they are no such thing. Nearly everything is a judgment call. Nearly every daily decision is based on vague and uncertain definitions.

(Fyi, I try to avoid the now-popular term "child abuse imagery" because that is both too loaded and too narrow.)

I teach the definition of child porn to forensics students because they will be running into it in the profession. It is massively complicated. My child porn lecture goes as follows: Here are the rules (cases, laws etc). Then I show a series of images and clips that, given the definitions we just went through, cause the cops in the room to reach for their handcuffs. Then I show where the clips are from: popular pg13 movies and TV shows, none of which would ever be considered illegal. I do this to illustrate the lack of bright lines, and how definitions and treatments change based on context.

To avoid uncomfortable discussions best done only in person, let me simply say that there exists a range of material at issue here, from 1 to 10. 1 is stuff that while it trigger flags clearly isn't illegal. 10 is stuff where there is no debate. The law declares everything above 5 a crime, but nothing below 8 is ever prosecuted absent political pressure (webeweb et al). To be safe, Google moves against anything a 3, as happened here. So there is a range of stuff, from 3 to 8, that may or may not be illegal. It will be deleted/reported by the likes of Google but will never result in prosecution.

This is yet another a horrible story of an artist suddenly finding himself in that gray area between 3 and 7. His stuff is probably not illegal, but nobody can say for certain. Google has chosen to run in fear, but we outsiders, most of whom have not seen the material, tend to side with the artist against the big evil corporation. And nobody want to speak openly for fear of the labels that attach. It's a messy area full of emotions and pitfalls. Society needs to address this problem.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#320

From Reddit: "I've read a few of Cooper's books and the short answer is yes, pedophilia is a common theme in his writing (as is incest and necrophilia)." [1] I'm calling it now. It was child porn. Google doesn't like to go around deleting people's stuff. When this has happened in the past it's been child porn, which Google is obligated by governments everywhere to delete with extreme prejudice. And of course they're…

Came here to make roughly this same assertion. As soon as I started reading about 'art' I was like well... the only reason google would pop it and not say anything is because it contained pedophilia material/underage 'art' and they probably wont be able to make an official statement until a police investigation results in either the material being released/oked or the guy getting charged.

Or the alternative, google didn't want to continue hosting the questionable content since it resides on their servers.

Post reply on HN