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

Someone has stolen my Instagram account

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 351 posts

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#201

Post by ummonk »

x3n0ph3n3 wrote: post #118
lightgreen wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when will people learn that Facebook, Google et al do not care at all about individual users? When will people learn, not just Facebook, Google et al, but no large company cares about individual users? Coca-Cola, Delta Air Lines, Ford, Unilever, Visa, Walmart do not care about individual users. Not because all of them are bad, but simply because they physically cannot deal with every complaint. Even worse, when the…

It's a little difference with Facebook and Google, because unlike the other companies you mentioned, users are not the customers of Facebook and Google -- advertisers are. There is very little incentive to make their users happy when their users are not paying for the service.

That actually isn’t true now that Oculus is requiring Facebook login.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#202

Post by dredmorbius »

throwigemp1 wrote: post #182

I work at Instagram and there's literally zero chance of this happening. I work on the backend, so I know the kind of tools or logging we do. If in the chance this happens remotely, like 1 in a million chance, the employee will be fired like instantly. I can't believe a random tweet with a screenshot is on front page of HN with 500+ upvotes.

The account transfer happening may well have occurred, whilst the mechanism is misrepresented (likely by the attacker). Either way, a claimed user is plausibly representing a problem with no viable recourse from IG/FB.

The upshot of unauthorised account transfer would still lie on Instagram/Facebook, and should you in fact be a back-end engineer, filing a ticket and escalation would be strongly encouraged.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#203

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

verroq wrote: post #197
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Spamming?” If repeated complaints about an issue the company won’t resolve is what we call spam now, I’m speechless.

He is a “free” user, what duty does Facebook owe him?

Are we talking legal duty or “not being an asshole” duty? I’d argue it’s at least the latter, where the case should be pretty clear.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#204

Post by ethbr0 »

whoknew1122 wrote: post #149
Kapura wrote: post #16

I think this is indicative of the biggest problem we have had with social media: there is no legalism here, just "codes of conduct" that companies and users both willfully ignore. If your handle gets sold by some facebook employee to a rich kid in LA, what recourse do you have? I don't know what laws this would break (maybe some broad definition of fraud? I Am Not A Lawyer) so it's not like this person has a slam dun…

I think this goes a bit broader than just social media. It really has to do with the concept of ownership of words/handles/subdomains on third-party systems. Who owns a twitter handle? Who owns an Instagram account handle? Do people with trademarks have a right to their trademark on a third-party system? I work at AWS. Some of our services allow you to customize subdomains (AWS SSO, as an example). There have been cu…

Precisely what I was going to link this to: the early (and now, TLD-expansion) domain name ownership mess.

The US (and seemingly other countries) trademark system is woefully underspecified for the modern world. Among other issues:

- Enforcement, given an exponential explosion of user-created public content with increasingly sophisticated tools

- 1:1 design & physical matter copying

- Likeness-intended / indistinguishable deepfakes

Trademark skated by on "Would it confuse potential customers?" for decades, but we're at a place where that's no longer sufficiently precise.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#205

Post by Sebb767 »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #147
grishka wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a nuisance to the people around you. If they're organizing something and make a FB/VK event for it, someone will have to bother themselves with relaying you all the updates via your preferred communication channels. We need working federated social media asap.

Talking to your friends specifically and directly is a nuisance?

In this context he's not wrong. Planning a party (for example) might involve a lot of discussion for time, food etc. It's far more complicated to organize this with everyone and find a common demoninator compared to simply putting people in a group, with everyone giving his input when needed.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#206

Post by mumblerino »

verroq wrote: post #197
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Spamming?” If repeated complaints about an issue the company won’t resolve is what we call spam now, I’m speechless.

He is a “free” user, what duty does Facebook owe him?

Ah yes sure you don’t pay Google a dime, so don’t you worry if you lose your account tomorrow, it’s not like anything is owed to you. Say bye to verroq@gmail.com

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#207

Post by JanNash »

toonarmybarmy wrote: post #195
JanNash wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve asked danny on Twitter if he can confirm this.

It hasn't. Although a product designer at FB has got involved. https://twitter.com/diegojimenez/status/1310266030388846595?...

Lo’ and behold!

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#208

Post by nrmitchi »

rvz wrote: post #156
nrmitchi wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, that rule is stupid. But your logic instagram could just give @kyliejenner to some random person, and you think she would have no recourse? You think it would be acceptable for someone at instagram to do Kylie Jenner a personal favor and give her `@kylie`, and the person who currently has it should have no recourse? Kylie is just an example person with a larger following; I'm not implying that this happened,…

> And yet, that rule is stupid. Doesn't matter. They can still do it to anyone anyway. > But your logic instagram could just give @kyliejenner to some random person, and you think she would have no recourse? Well yes. They (Facebook) own the platform, it's a privately owned company and they can do whatever they like either via the ToS or in general. You don't own your account handle. They reserve the right to termina…

> Well yes.

Strong disagree. If Facebook tried this against anyone with a moderate following there would be a Tortious interference and/or fraud lawsuit filed _immediately_.

When Trump's twitter account was deleted by a rogue employee for all of 10 minutes, Twitter most definitely did not just sit back and say "We reserve the right to terminate your account at any time".

> it's a privately owned company

I know this is going to sound pedantic, but this is wrong. Facebook is a publicly-owned company.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#209

Post by ipsum2 »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #129
ipsum2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, but it sounds like the issue was resolved (correctly or incorrectly) the first time, so the user started filing a ton of issues, which were automatically marked as duplicate. Now he's spamming the white hat security form ( https://twitter.com/dannyjhall/status/1310231761444581385 ), which is not likely to get him a response.

“Spamming?” If repeated complaints about an issue the company won’t resolve is what we call spam now, I’m speechless.

Spamming the white hat security bug program won't get him an answer, because he's not reporting a security flaw.

Re: Someone has stolen my Instagram account

#210

Post by lightgreen »

nkozyra wrote: post #194
lightgreen wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is an economic and political system. An economic and political system technically literally cannot care about people, same way as temperature, gravity, philosophy or history cannot care about people.

This is an extremely reductive. Temperature or gravity are not composed of people, who have the ability to make change within the system they comprise.

Let me rephrase.

Too high or too low temperature environment can hurt people. People with a soldeing iron can hurt people. People putting other people in the fridge can hurt people. Just temperature is not something which can do anything to anyone.

Capitalist companies, people living in capitalism, governments under capitalism, taxes and so on may be good or bad for people.

But saying "capitalism does not give a shit about people" is just literally nonsense. Of course it doesn't because an economic and political system is not an actor.

I could infer from the original comment that all actors under capitalism "do not give a shit", but that's obviously untrue. For example, wikipedia lives under capitalism and benefits from the capitalist system, and obiously it is good for people.

I could assume that the actor mean very narrow group of actors when they said "capitalism", but I won't because I will likely be wrong about understanding what the author really wanted to say (rich people? all people? large corporations? any corporations? including non-profits? and so on). It would be better if the author added some clarity to their comments. Would be better if the author said what exactly they wanted to say without throwing literally meaningless socialist slogans.

Post reply on HN