61–70 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the resolution shift happens client side, before the photo is transmitted to their servers. They couldn't have the full res version stored elsewhere. That's how we know.
How do we know the resolution shift happens client side? I did a quick google and found nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big deal is that someone is profiting from my work without my consent and it isn't me . It's that we (the people) get slammed by DMCA violations for taking someone else's content (for private consumption). When a huge corporation takes ours (and gets paid for it), what recourse do we have? It's that these corporations can change the rules on us in the middle of the game. It's the classic bait and switch. It's tha…
Technically we _are_ giving our consent by using the service. In fact, we already agreed to the current terms, which state "We reserve the right to alter these Terms of Use at any time." It's not even a classic bait-and-switch. It's clearly stated in the contract we all signed up for. I agree that it's sort of uncool on Instagram's part, but as fellow app developers, shouldn't we also be siding with Instagram for the…
Instagram's change is in one of the grey areas that makes contract law interesting.
(I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, yada yada)
For those of you who don't think this is a big deal. Instagram is explicitly stating that they're going to sell the use of your pictures to third parties. They're also going to start showing ads in their news stream. I know the pictures are of too low quality to be plastered on a billboard. That's not the point. What I expect they want to happen is something like this: I post a picture of me drinking a Coke to Instag…
I experienced the effectiveness of seeing a friend's face on an ad first hand a few years ago, when a friend of mine put up a job-posting ad on facebook with his face on it. My engagement with that ad was ridiculously high and it lead me to go proactively research what his company was about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big deal is that someone is profiting from my work without my consent and it isn't me . It's that we (the people) get slammed by DMCA violations for taking someone else's content (for private consumption). When a huge corporation takes ours (and gets paid for it), what recourse do we have? It's that these corporations can change the rules on us in the middle of the game. It's the classic bait and switch. It's tha…
Technically we _are_ giving our consent by using the service. In fact, we already agreed to the current terms, which state "We reserve the right to alter these Terms of Use at any time." It's not even a classic bait-and-switch. It's clearly stated in the contract we all signed up for. I agree that it's sort of uncool on Instagram's part, but as fellow app developers, shouldn't we also be siding with Instagram for the…
You just have to have a little bit of foresight into this, understand that users have emotions, if not total understanding of law, and figure out if the changes that benefit you will outweigh the pr hit. I think it is obvious in this case (and probably 9 times out of 10) that the owners of the app stand to benefit more than they'll get hurt.
Hell, opt me in automatically by default. But maybe this is the compromise, that way Instagram can make money (as they should) and users don't feel ripped off.
For those of you who don't think this is a big deal. Instagram is explicitly stating that they're going to sell the use of your pictures to third parties. They're also going to start showing ads in their news stream. I know the pictures are of too low quality to be plastered on a billboard. That's not the point. What I expect they want to happen is something like this: I post a picture of me drinking a Coke to Instag…
I get a free/fun app instead of $100. Instead of a .01% chance, I have a .00000001% of appearing in an objectionable ad (my photos just aren't as good as pros, and I'm just not that pretty). Add to that-- if this happens, I certainly won't be the first one it happens to and will almost certainly have an opportunity to delete my account when I start hearing about this happening in the wild. Even if I don't delete it, the chance of my crappy photos getting found/used out of the MANY BILLIONS on instagram also seems laughably small.
Statistically, this could bite me-- but I have to figure that the chance is so close to 0% that the (small) reward of using Instagram is worth the (trivial) risk. I also tend to dismiss concerns around lightning, sharks, and hijackers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does deleting your account actually remove your photos? I've seen some people claim that you can still load the images if you know the URL. Not sure if it's just a CDN that hasn't expired the content yet or if Instagram really keeps your photos after you "delete" them.
I wouldn't doubt it. I've Facebook URL of images that were "deleted" year ago, but the links still work. I'm not sure what it would take for the content to actually be removed.