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

Omegle 2009-2023

omegle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#671

Post by DoItToMe81 »

jawns wrote: post #285

Yes, this message from the founder sounds very heartfelt and earnest. But if he truly could not anticipate the many ways that this service would be abused, and in fact the ways it is especially attractive to people with bad intentions, then he is profoundly naive. It reminds me of Craigslist. Similarly well-intentioned, but eventually the company has gotta face the facts about how the service you're offering is condu…

He implemented algorithms to automatically time out people who were mentioning a variety of rapey terms and paid moderators and built AI algorithms to (mostly successfully) wipe out the rampant sex pest behavior in video chats.

He did about the best job you can do without a team that costs tens of millions of dollars, and the result was being sued and accused of being a pedophile.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#672

Post by loxdalen »

sergioisidoro wrote: post #643
thrawn0r wrote: post #594

More specific information about why its closing down are lawsuits of groomed minors. press coverage of 1 case: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64618791

In that article she was 11 when using Omegle. She was using internet without appropriate supervision. That's almost like allowing a kid to drive a car, leading to an accident, and then trying to ban cars because they are dangerous to kids. The internet is a great place, but it's an adult place. You can find absolutely horrible (adult) things on wikipedia that a kid should not be learning about at the age of 11. And I…

Realistically, kids are on the Internet.

I don't know when you were born, but my relationship to the Internet started probably around the time I was 7 or 8. My school had computers with Internet, there were two computers at home. My parents could have limited my Internet use but they couldn't have stopped me. There is not a guard standing by every computer stopping me from being Online if I am under 18 years of age.

I still don't think Omegle is at fault, but we have to assume kids are on the Internet.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#673

Post by doublerabbit »

LauraMedia wrote: post #669

Omegle was a horrible place that was not moderated enough and enabled groomers. It was also a place that felt very "old school internet" due to the "wild west style".

> It was also a place that felt very "old school internet" due to the "wild west style".

And what's wrong with that. The current internet feels like a playground where we are forced to fall in order to the wall garden owner.

When you use the internet you should have the sense that the domain your going to access requires yourself to need to apply self caution.

Letting a 11 year old online without supervision is just lazy neglected parenting.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#674

Post by DeusExMachina »

loxdalen wrote: post #672
sergioisidoro wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that article she was 11 when using Omegle. She was using internet without appropriate supervision. That's almost like allowing a kid to drive a car, leading to an accident, and then trying to ban cars because they are dangerous to kids. The internet is a great place, but it's an adult place. You can find absolutely horrible (adult) things on wikipedia that a kid should not be learning about at the age of 11. And I…

Realistically, kids are on the Internet. I don't know when you were born, but my relationship to the Internet started probably around the time I was 7 or 8. My school had computers with Internet, there were two computers at home. My parents could have limited my Internet use but they couldn't have stopped me. There is not a guard standing by every computer stopping me from being Online if I am under 18 years of age.…

They sure are, but we can argue they shouldn't, or that they should be supervised.

Not that it's going to happen. Too many people slap a device in front of their kids with an unlimited data plan and no supervision.

It's a hard problem to solve, probably as unsolvable as any other wide-scale problem.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#675

Post by joenot443 »

op00to wrote: post #645
Blahah wrote: post #103

Gives me chills, that was so heartfelt and raw. Hurt on all sides, but this is a bit like losing access to a public space because someone committed crimes there. One of the greatest things Omegle enabled is this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhzHV9QD0Is (Harry Mack freestyling for random Omegle matches, it was a series of 90+ episodes and brought me and others so much joy during COVID)

> a bit like losing access to a public space It's more like losing access to a bar that allowed random people to meet in private rooms, and didn't check they weren't giving access to minors, and didn't check inside the private rooms to prevent sexual abuse.

And so now they’ll have to choose one of the other, even seedier bars. The kids aren’t any better off.

You’ve made a poor analogy, though, since obviously it’s very trivial for a bar to validate age at the door. If such a thing were easy for Omegle to do, I’m sure they would.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#676

Post by codebolt »

dotancohen wrote: post #578
concordDance wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but the rates of depression and general unhappiness in the West are definitely up from 30 years ago.

No, there is more awareness and they are more vocal now.

Wrong. The rates are higher and the main reason is obvious.

Fewer families being formed => more lonely adults => more people depressed.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#677

Post by sgammon »

master-lincoln wrote: post #637
andrepd wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bad take on several levels. First the de-fi angle. You want a distributed application, no need to shoehorn crypto into there. But second and most important: the ultralibertarian angle of "you chose to be there so you take respinsabolity for whatever happens to you" is also not good. For one, there's children. For another, moderation and law enforcement is a good thing. Whatever replaces omegle will almost c…

Children shouldn't be browsing the internet without supervision. If they do I'd argue their parents should be regulated more, not the internet.

Ironic argument given the article, no? Did the author not just make a fantastic argument for structuring justice to protect rights?

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#678

Post by Aeolun »

will5421 wrote: post #601
Aeolun wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure if I’d call the internet itself a net negative. Somewhere around the time it was incepted it was fine. Exchanging emails and whatnot. But what it has become now… I dunno, I regularly have calls with my family on the other side of the world. That’s definitely a positive. Everything attendant to the internet I do not like. The way it’s become nearly a requirement of life.

But would you have moved so far away from your family if you couldn’t have kept in touch with them over the Internet?

Probably, yeah. Phone calls would have sufficed. Video adds something, but sending regular letters and pictures would have been fun in a completely different way.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#679

Post by doublerabbit »

lazide wrote: post #261
dragonwriter wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, 1994-1996ish web was in some ways worse -- yes, there was horrible stuff on Usenet, but you could avoid the worst of the text stuff pretty easily, and to be assaulted by any media other than text you had to expend at least a little effort. In the early web, you were just a poorly chosen search term and click away from some truly awful media.

We don’t talk about 2 girls 1 cup anymore. Or goatse. Ugh, man those were a rough time.

Mudfall, bluewaffle ...

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#680

Post by joenot443 »

throwaway290 wrote: post #624
buf wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't this have been any website with a messaging system on it? Twitter, facebook, even email. I don't get how they can sue Omegle for this. Edit: was it because of the video component of Omegle?

Twitter, Facebook, Gmail, Telegram, WhatsApp, Zoom and all those companies with UGC have this, responsible ones report it (Meta does lots, not sure Twitter does anymore, Telegram never did). > I don't get how they can sue Omegle for this. Take it as a sign that if tech community doesn't wake up and own up to this and try to solve the issue somehow then not just individual services but the entire idea of e2ee messagin…

Orders of magnitude more grooming and misconduct is done over SMS than was ever done over Omegle.

Is it up to telecom engineers to “wake up” and own that they’re facilitating this abuse? It seems like one of those finger pointing cases which falls apart when any level of scrutiny is applied.

Post reply on HN