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

Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

imgurinc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 476 posts

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#151

Post by neilv »

ezekiel68 wrote: post #129
user- wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reference being someones ass crack having a picture taken without their consent and posted for millions to see, which is why the OP of that time got banned temporarily i think for that. Its pretty hypocritcal of imgur to use that image , and somewhat ironic to use it in this TOS update

We don't know who the person was. We have no interest in forensically doxxing them. The person stands in as a proxy for any person. Neither the person's life, livelihood, reputation, nor dignity are tarnished in any way by the posting of this image. No person has the "right" to not be photographed in public. There is no evidence the posting of this photo resulted in the financial gain of the poster. Where there is no…

This is a lot of assertions of fact, almost all of which either don't match my understanding of the situation, or are things that I don't understand how could be known so definitively.

Also, this is speaking in a way that might sound like some referencing some legal standard, or being an exhaustive or overwhelming philosophical analysis. But, even were these assertions true, I suggest that the argument is missing the issue raised.

Specifically, the image used as an example of 'ok' in one part of the Imgur policy document arguably hits all over the specific language of the harassment section of the same document. See quoted parts.

It seems an incredibly poor example to choose, and it's arguably a renewed instance of harassing image posting by their own definitions.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#152

Post by rektide »

How much do we wager this is an internal decision, versus how much do we think this is a result of external forces? Have various assorted governments just made life a total pain I the ass, or is Imgur no longer interested in being the image server of the internet?

This feels like yet another recent chilling case where Barlow's Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace should probably be rolled out. Where shitty governmental fear mongering trash again just makes being online in authentic & dirty ways harder & harder.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#153

Post by thedrbrian »

munchler wrote: post #67
pclmulqdq wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I personally have 5 Twitter accounts and 20+ Reddit accounts (sometimes you want to have different perspectives on an issue, have different front pages, or maybe manufacture a consensus). Only the main Twitter account has been asked for a phone number - I think they actually know about alt accounts and don't mind you having them as long as you don't do anything crazy with them. Don't worry…

> maybe manufacture a consensus You're running a one-person troll farm? Please reconsider your choices in life.

>You're running a one-person troll farm? Please reconsider your choices in life.

how else do journalists write this articles on internet hate mobs?

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#154

Post by tick_tock_tick »

neilv wrote: post #58

I don't understand why Imgur did the following on https://imgurinc.com/rules , which I'd assume would be vetted by a lawyer... Caption on example photo of mocking an obese person sitting on a too-small metal folding chair, consequently with a little butt crack visible (maybe at an MtG event): > This buttcrack isn't intended to stimulate erotic feelings, so it's ok. Two sections later, this photo itself seems to hit a…

[flagged]

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#155

Post by dougmwne »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #101
015a wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fantastic time to be alive and prepared to start the third generation of internet companies. You've got Google in a panic against OpenAI, Meta is imploding, Twitter is imploding, Reddit can't help but drive users away, and now least of all Imgur also deciding to follow them off the cliff; I genuinely feel blessed to watch these companies tear themselves apart. Like in all things; we, the data hoarders, the…

Also, lots of top tier talent is being laid off, and many others are well-capitalized and eager to flee to fully remote companies, or to start their own companies. Looking back a decade from now, we'll notice that many of the unicorns will have been founded in 2023.

And it'll all be thanks to tightening monetary policy!

Which is lighthearted, but not a joke. Economic theory says that the economic cycle helps to free up misallocated resources.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#156

Post by rarspace01 »

ezekiel68 wrote: post #129
user- wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reference being someones ass crack having a picture taken without their consent and posted for millions to see, which is why the OP of that time got banned temporarily i think for that. Its pretty hypocritcal of imgur to use that image , and somewhat ironic to use it in this TOS update

We don't know who the person was. We have no interest in forensically doxxing them. The person stands in as a proxy for any person. Neither the person's life, livelihood, reputation, nor dignity are tarnished in any way by the posting of this image. No person has the "right" to not be photographed in public. There is no evidence the posting of this photo resulted in the financial gain of the poster. Where there is no…

"No person has the "right" to not be photographed in public." Maybe in your country, not mine.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#157

Post by futureshock »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #87

The pendulum has clearly started to swing back to sexual repression. Society has started to see sexual freedom and expression as grotesque. Now the only question is how far it'll swing.

I think we live in an increasingly neo-victorian age. It's not just sex. It has become toxic to express a wide range of opinions. For example, the systematic deplatforming of conservatives. (I am a liberal, and my need to state that to be taken seriously is further evidence of all this.)

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#158

Post by realworldperson »

throwaway2990 wrote: post #93

I wish imgur would go away entirely. It’s such a toxic community of people. If you are not aligned with their doctrine you get spammed with downvotes and some of the most hateful replies I’ve ever seen. You report it but it stays there.

[dead]

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#160

Post by vasco »

xmprt wrote: post #133
vasco wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mention it like they haven't done a ton of user hostile releases, like the constant UX dark patterns to push you to a mobile app, etc. This argument is so strange, should we refute anything against Meta with "but the original founder is there, there's no corporate"?

I think the argument isn't that Reddit isn't corporate but rather that the original founders have thought it through a lot and have still decided to make this decision.

I'm sure Mark Zuckerberg thinks through all his major decisions a lot too. If you think a lot and your result is dark patterns, does that matter so much?
Post reply on HN