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

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

fusion.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 457 posts

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

#421

Post by 67726e »

bigB wrote: post #413
67726e wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm just a lazy fuck? I know backups, I get it, but you know what? I'm human.

A very very lazy human if you cant backup for 14 years....i hate mowing my lawn or doing my shopping but i have to do it. Going to work each day is a chore but somehow it happens...being lazy and human is the poorest excuse ive heard for not backing up over such a long period of time, and I deal with data loss whiners every day. If you dont want to lose it, make a copy, end of story.

Oh go fuck yourself you judgmental asshole.

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

#422

Post by leephillips »

Arnt wrote: post #410
leephillips wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RFC 4409 is obsoleted by RFC 6409 (Nov. 2011), which is the one I refer to. The sections therein on header rewriting do not allow the modifications that Google makes to the From: header, which can, as I point out, lead to mismatches of personal names and email addresses and falsification of sender identity, with all the easily foreseeable damage that may result.

6409 contains the same wording: "MAY modify submissions to ensure compliance with standards and site policy" and gives examples. The sections on header rewriting are essentially examples of what the document describes as "modifications that are often considered useful", they're not an exhaustive list. The only MUST NOT rule that concerns email address rewriting is about destination addresses.

Is it your opinion that a reasonable interpretation of 6409 is that a submission agent may falsify the sender of an email? Or create false associations between personal names and email addresses?

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

#423

Post by gajjanag »

enlightenedfool wrote: post #73
NameNickHN wrote: post #33

I can never understand why people don't host important stuff/stuff they care about themselves. Webhosting and domains are cheap and even someone with little technical knowledge can create a website. There are tons of options to do that.

And it only costs $10-15/yr for your own domain + email. I don't understand why people consider that a great expense.

The problem is not necessarily the expense - there are a whole bunch of steps that need to be taken in order to ensure that the big hosts don't flag your mails as spam - https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126.

And even if it seems to be working fine at the moment, there are no practical guarantees that this will not be subject to change: https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/DiG9qANf5PA. Even someone as high profile as Linus Torvalds had to resort to the classic method of public shaming in order to get a prompt response.

Lastly, there is not much incentive even if I cared about privacy - my typical recipient is anyway a Gmail account, so Google can definitely construct a shadow profile for the sender even if the sender does not use Gmail.

Again, it is a classic problem of a heavily centralized internet.

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

#424

Post by jamesrcole »

modeless wrote: post #196

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…

Ok, so that's a pretty serious accusation you're leveling at the author and their reputation.

What bothers me about the lack of transparency is that it makes it very difficult for any person in such a situation -- whom I think should be presumed innocent until and if they're proven guilty -- to defend their reputation against such presumptions.

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

#425

Post by progman »

a3n wrote: post #241
progman wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the users of course. Remember the modem times when the users had to pay for the phone bills. In the same way users could use their phone lines for the next internet. We could also build a wifi mesh with mobile devices.

Not to be negative, but last mile was a viable part of the internet because the government mandates that that system be reliable. I'm interested in a wifi mesh, but until this moment I haven't thought about whether the government, or the technology itself, focuses on high reliability in that area. I think all the government cares about is if you don't interfere, but they don't care if your bits get through.

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Facebooks-OpenCellular-Off...

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

#426

Post by jwilk »

daveloyall wrote: post #166
Arnt wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cite RFC?

Back when I set up a client to pull from Gmail it would break twice a year: when the changed their TLS cert, and when the later changed it BACK. My conclusion at the time was that they wanted to keep the percentage of users of the IMAP service below some value, and every time the jerked the config around, they'd see a dip in the graph on their end. My setup is currently non-functional. The maintenance cost was too hi…

I've seen IMAP certificates changing back and forth, too.

There's an explanation of this phenomenon that doesn't assume malice: there are N (> 1) servers with different certificates, and you're not hitting the same one every time.

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

#427

Post by nitrogen »

madmax96 wrote: post #393
DougMerritt wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rather unfair to accuse the other person of creating a strawman. Google was quoted above as calling the service "A safe place for all your files", and deletion is clearly not "safe", and there have been court decisions saying that fine print caveats cannot completely negate the clear English part of the advertising. Of course, there have been court decisions saying the opposite, too, but that's sufficient for th…

Right, but that's not what they were responding to. OP was trying to make it seem like Google acting hypocritically by allegedly helping foster an entitlement mentality was the same as false advertising.

"Entitlement mentality" is a highly loaded and manipulative term, and I reject its use in this context.

Managing consumer expectations in a way that does not reflect reality is the same as false advertising, however.

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

#428

Post by Broken_Hippo »

janekm wrote: post #134

The fact that every single comment in this thread amounts to "should have backed up" makes me a little sad. Is this really what we want to expect from companies like Google? Is this acceptable? Is it just a "force of nature" that I should consider beyond the ken of man? What happened here is the abrogation of human responsibility onto algorithms, TOS, with no apparent human oversight. A very disturbing trend, and I t…

I'm an artist - though not well known or anything, nor do I sell often or anything. I do post in a few places online, however. And I have everything backed up, on my computer and an external hard drive. My work isn't digital, so I have that. not all do.

It isn't what we should expect from google, but it still stands that the artist shouldnt have relied on simply one thing to keep his stuff safe. Accidents happen places, perfectly reasonable (albeit unfortunate) ones. This is the main reason for having backups. The fact that the guy didn't have some of this already in place is, indeed, his fault. It is unfortunate that there is little to no human interface.

The interrupt to his interaction with fans/customers is more unfortunate - that is more difficult to replace. However, if he had another website or public communication form, Some of these folks would look him up. The main problem with this seems to be the sort of art he produced, which wasn't welcome on all platforms.

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

#429

Post by broken_symlink »

wstrange wrote: post #74

It looks like his work is not deleted, just not accessible due to possible TOS violations? I am guessing he can get it back. The title seems like click-bait.

Also, if he did violate the terms I'm not sure why he would think it would be a good idea to sue.

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

#430

Post by wvenable »

wpietri wrote: post #405
wvenable wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the problem is software necessarily, it's scale. Software allows for scale but it's not the underlying cause. Google is responsible for the content of maybe hundreds of millions of people; if even a small fraction of them have issues that's overwhelming. At that scale it's impossible for you to be anything other than nothing to them.

> At that scale it's impossible for you to be anything other than nothing to them. Even if that's the case, it is not impossible. It's just a choice that they made about how to structure things. The US government has hundreds of millions of citizens, but each one of those persons has rights, responsibilities, and privileges. The Catholic Church has hundreds of millions of members, but each one can have a personal rel…

Except neither of those things is "free".
Post reply on HN