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

At least now we know why Color really got that funding

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 164 posts

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#131

Post by endergen »

sorbus wrote: post #93
thezilch wrote: post #21

How long before Color becomes Chat Roulette? What protections are children afforded where the content is not "personally identifiable?" And how long after that before Apple drops Color from their App Store?

I've been wondering about that for a while. The application is vulnerable to GPS spoofing (you can get your phone to tell it that you are somewhere you aren't), and while all the stuff it does to identify location (amount of light, listening to sound) is nifty, it can surely be defeated. How long will it be until hardcore pornography fills the feed at some major event? Or spam images, asking the reader to visit a sit…

There are some good PGP type filtersnyouncould do. The more pictures of yourself you take the more likely you are who you claim. You can't reuse an visual identity very well because you can't be in two places at once. If strangers are constantly taking pictures with you then that adds to the validity of your identity.

So GPS spoofing would allow you to flood some area with a feed but for how long, you need to fake so many things. And you won't get connected to someone unless they mutually take a photo.

It's very clever in it's ability to naturally prevent cheating. Which brings us back to why it's so creepy.

I'm not gonna lie. I'm too much of a futurist to not think the data it collects isn't gonna be freaking powerful/cool.

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#132

Post by statictype »

jgruber wrote: post #113
flyt wrote: post #11

Don't worry, if Apple acquires them (like they did their last company, Lala) then Gruber will suddenly realize how revolutionary the idea is.

Funny, I can't seem to find the article where I said much of anything about Lala, post- or pre-acquisition by Apple, let alone the one where I claimed they were "revolutionary". Please let me know the URL for that piece.

Could you link to your HN profile from Daring Fireball (or something equivalent)? I'm having doubts about whether you're actually John Gruber or not, if only because you would have used 'gruber' instead of jgruber (gruber is still available from what I can see). Would be nice to have it cleared up once and for all.

And if you're not John Gruber of Daring Fireball, then please remove the lies on your profile page.

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#133

Post by ngsayjoe »

rbarooah wrote: post #123
ngsayjoe wrote: post #118

I uninstalled it the moment I realized i can't remove my photo from the app. I guess it will be stored permanently public in Color. (Yes, you can slide the photo left to remove it, but it'd still show up in my stream!)

It did eventually disappear from the stream for me, and for me, it look as though there was nobody else around to see it!

Hmmm, maybe the removed photo doesn't reflect in the stream real-time (but will eventually) ... i may give it another try.

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#134

Post by lotharbot »

ThomPete wrote: post #121
metellus wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except he's not trying to discredit Gruber. He's pointing out that Gruber is able to be unbiased because the product isn't owned by Apple.

Huh? So when the product is owned by Apple he is unbiased?

No. The opposite of this.

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#135

Post by stbullard »

sidmitra wrote: post #46
eps wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are EXIF tags added by the iOS when taking a picture? Or by the app calling the camera API after the photo is taken? I would guess it's latter.

What is interesting is, if a few person in the graph start identifying themselves on their profiles. Then there might be a way to identify the others in a picture based on his nearby graph, other attributes(like gender + common friends). Others have already shown how easy is to de-anonymize a social graph from public datasets[couldn't find the relevant paper]

Relevant research is at http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~shmat/shmat_oak09.pdf (warning: PDF).

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#136

Post by wtn »

cft wrote: post #98
mrshoe wrote: post #58

I remember attending a Startup School talk wherein Max Levchin explained that Slide wasn't a "pimp my MySpace" company, but rather a data mining company using MySpace widgets as the trojan horse. So, Nguyen isn't the first serial entrepreneur to receive loads of funding based on his reputation and attempt to exploit the trend du jour to mine data from the masses. We all saw how well that worked out for Slide. My gues…

Max still made about $40M personally on Slide. The real loser in that acquisition is Google. I think the VC scene in the Silicon Valley is becoming more and more screwed up (becoming more resume/track record, rather than innovative product focused), and the Silicon Valley will pay dearly for this.

I don't see how SV or innovation will suffer greatly. People who don't have the nice VC connections can bootstrap and make it to profitability.

The people who stand to lose are VCs and their accredited investors. Legitimate companies with actual revenues should be able to get funding even if the VC funds leave.

One downside is that VC money is determining where the software developers go, which could lead to suboptimal allocation of skilled labor. However, some of these heretofore unprofitable ventures provide real value to the public (ie Twitter).

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#137

Post by oldstrangers »

twidlit wrote: post #40

Color is not the sonic scanning mobile device in Dark Knight, it was the multi-lens visual scanner Lucius Fox threatened to quit over and self-destructed when they found Joker. Bruce Wayne is Nguyen and we are Lucius Fox, but in this case there is no Joker to catch.

Money is the joker in this case.

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#138

Post by lurker14 »

endergen wrote: post #131
sorbus wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been wondering about that for a while. The application is vulnerable to GPS spoofing (you can get your phone to tell it that you are somewhere you aren't), and while all the stuff it does to identify location (amount of light, listening to sound) is nifty, it can surely be defeated. How long will it be until hardcore pornography fills the feed at some major event? Or spam images, asking the reader to visit a sit…

There are some good PGP type filtersnyouncould do. The more pictures of yourself you take the more likely you are who you claim. You can't reuse an visual identity very well because you can't be in two places at once. If strangers are constantly taking pictures with you then that adds to the validity of your identity. So GPS spoofing would allow you to flood some area with a feed but for how long, you need to fake so…

Why don't you try that last sentence again without so many negatives, and see if you don't like it less?

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#139

Post by felix0702 »

There will always be people who will post pictures publicly at different places. (similar to Youtube) There will always be people who will check out who are the crowds in different places. (similar to Youtube) With almost every phone being equipped with camera in the future, there will be even more pictures than video stored in Youtube. They probably will let you find people who have similar interests in each location. When they have a huge stored pictures and people's location preferences, I am sure they'll have ways to generate revenues. If college kids love and often use this application, they should have a chance (I think). Otherwise, ...

Re: At least now we know why Color really got that funding

#140

Post by pbhjpbhj »

minalecs wrote: post #26
tenaciousJk wrote: post #9

Actually, I think it will be much worse than that. Think: location based advertising. In order to use color you have to allow GPS for the app and, optionally, push-notifications. A perfect combo for pushing ads when you're within X range, etc. I sent a tweet to them yesterday, but got no response. https://twitter.com/#!/tenaciousJk/status/51033367050846208 edit: group response to the below No geo-ad platform has this…

um foursquare already sort of does this, go to the places tab, and it shows you how many specials are nearby.

Presumably Color inc. are doing some visual processing to read brands from images too and to possibly establish demographics?
Post reply on HN