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

Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 140 posts

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#31

Post by pretoriusB »

imgabe wrote: post #9
pretoriusB wrote: post #5

> So Instagram is now going to use photos taken by its users in advertising, and they may or may not disclose to viewers when the advertising is happening. No, they are NOT going to do that. It's 2012. Why are people --and especially someone like Wheaton-- behaving like it's 1994 and they are learning this "web" thing for the first time? I've seen the same bloody story play up 10 or 20 times. They made a BS change on…

> The backslash from the users Yes, this backlash from users is exactly what's happening. You can't simultaneously try to dissuade the backlash from happening and depend on it to prevent the undesirable events from taking place.

>Yes, this backlash from users is exactly what's happening. You can't simultaneously try to dissuade the backlash from happening and depend on it to prevent the undesirable events from taking place.

No, but I CAN and AM expecting people participating in the backlash:

a) NOT to behave like it's the first time they are seeing this

b) NOT to behave like this move was intended as perceived, and

c) NOT to behave like this wont be reverted pronto.

And I expect this especially from internet savvy people like Wheaton, who have seen this play out tens of times on the nets with similar licence changes...

Had Wheaton written something like "I'm sure this is another one of countless examples of ill-thought and quickly reverted license changes" I would be totally OK.

The way it is now, it's like someone writing "Oh, my god, Charlie Brown was tricked again by Lucy, I don't believe it!!!!" for paragraph after paragraph.

Not to mention that I also presented several other reasons besides the backlash why this is a non-story (for one, it's inconceivable as a business move, when a competitor, Twitter, just turned on "kill mode", second it doesn't make sense as a monetization tactic, it's not like hipster filtered photos are a stock photo favorite, or stock photography itself is a large market).

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#32

Post by debacle »

OafTobark wrote: post #8

I'll be honest. If it wasn't for Big Bang Theory, I'd have no clue who this guy was. Even with reference to Star Trek, I can't remember his character. Not sure why I'd care about his opinion on a semi-tech related topic (I know, not about me and my own opinion).

Because he's very active in the digital rights arena (and especially video games).

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#33

Post by untog »

pretoriusB wrote: post #5

> So Instagram is now going to use photos taken by its users in advertising, and they may or may not disclose to viewers when the advertising is happening. No, they are NOT going to do that. It's 2012. Why are people --and especially someone like Wheaton-- behaving like it's 1994 and they are learning this "web" thing for the first time? I've seen the same bloody story play up 10 or 20 times. They made a BS change on…

most likely they screwed up the phrasing but meant something extremely more limited

Then they should probably fire their lawyers. It's kind of what they're supposed to do for a living.

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#34

Post by ianstallings »

This is dubious at best. He doesn't use it, he's not a lawyer, and his grasp on what they are doing is plain wrong. I'm not saying that privacy concerns are moot. I'm saying Wil Wheaton is your typical self-proclaimed geek these days. He shoots from the hip at anything that might trounce his sense of entitlement.

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#35

Post by bad_user »

jerf wrote: post #27
casca wrote: post #3

Axiom 1: Company is collecting and storing personal data that you voluntarily provide Axiom 2: Company does not charge you for this service Axiom 3: Company has no other visible means of income Axiom 4: Company has non-trivial operating expenses Given that this covers a huge amount of "our digital life", there are a few possible solutions: - Keep getting services without paying money but paying with privacy - Identif…

Wil's point about companies using information about you that you did not provide, and in fact have no relationship with, business or otherwise, is a more interesting one. For some people, contact information is a very sensitive matter, and celebrities are the uninteresting case, compared to those being stalked, witness protection, etc. How are we going to deal with this? Especially in light of the fact that the data…

The problem here is not that "DRM in general is impossible" and I fail to see how DRM could solve the issue with Instagram, even if DRM wasn't totally broken. Facebook can access your phone contacts and Instagram can access your photos only with your consent. You're willingly giving them that data.

The far bigger issue here is that services like Instagram can take and use your data without your consent indirectly. If I give your photo or your phone number or your location to some service and that action brings you harm, who's to blame and whom can you sue?

I'm not a lawyer, but I bet it's not going to be Instagram or Facebook or the other offenders out there ;-) And DRM here is meaningless.

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#37

Post by pretoriusB »

mtgx wrote: post #16
pretoriusB wrote: post #5

> So Instagram is now going to use photos taken by its users in advertising, and they may or may not disclose to viewers when the advertising is happening. No, they are NOT going to do that. It's 2012. Why are people --and especially someone like Wheaton-- behaving like it's 1994 and they are learning this "web" thing for the first time? I've seen the same bloody story play up 10 or 20 times. They made a BS change on…

Didn't Facebook already use people's pictures in their ads? What makes you so sure this will not happen again? (well okay, maybe not after all this outrage).

Instagram using users pictures in their ads (for Instagram itself) is totally fine (with the appropriate warning in the TOS). Companies do that all the time.

The problem would be Instragram using user pictures for third-party ads, ie. selling user pictures to ad agencies.

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#38

Post by tjr »

OafTobark wrote: post #8

I'll be honest. If it wasn't for Big Bang Theory, I'd have no clue who this guy was. Even with reference to Star Trek, I can't remember his character. Not sure why I'd care about his opinion on a semi-tech related topic (I know, not about me and my own opinion).

I have no idea who most of the authors of essays submitted to HN are. Sometimes I come to know more about them by reading more of their work, but usually I don't know who they are before then. Same for the vast majority of folks posting comments.

If we are interested only in the opinions of people we already know, how can a site like HN even exist?

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#39

Post by bad_user »

jval wrote: post #26
casca wrote: post #3

Axiom 1: Company is collecting and storing personal data that you voluntarily provide Axiom 2: Company does not charge you for this service Axiom 3: Company has no other visible means of income Axiom 4: Company has non-trivial operating expenses Given that this covers a huge amount of "our digital life", there are a few possible solutions: - Keep getting services without paying money but paying with privacy - Identif…

> Axiom 3: Company has no other visible means of income This is not true. There are plenty of other ways for social sites to make money. If Twitter is doing billions off promoted Tweets, then surely a company like Facebook which has even more data on you can make a similar amount selling standard targeted advertising. What we are seeing here is crossing the line. The worst thing is, this data was acquired under compl…

All of them did it. Facebook, Twitter, Google, Instagram.

First they get popular, then when they're big enough having the luxury of lock-in, they turn to fucking the same users that made them popular.

Web 2.0 - taking the milk out of stupid cows that should have known better.

Re: Wil Wheaton on Instagram's new ad policy

#40

Post by zaidf »

Meanwhile just to read this post, I must accept some google+ TOS and create my nth g+ account:

Mobile terms of service

By tapping 'Accept', you agree that Google will use your location in this product and accept the Mobile Terms of Service.

Post reply on HN