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

The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#41

Post by kevinchen »

GuiA wrote: post #37
digitalengineer wrote: post #4

This: "The audiences that Di Petta and Cameron have built are created with the work of photographers who they don't pay or even credit . They don't provide sources for the photographs or the captions that accompany them. Sometimes they get stuff wrong and/or post copyrighted photographs. " Combined with this: "I'm sure the majority of photographers would be glad to have their work seen by the massives." Nothing 'new…

> They don't provide sources for the photographs or the captions that accompany them. Sometimes they get stuff wrong and/or post copyrighted photographs. I can reverse-search for any picture on Google Images and, with extremely high accuracy, find a picture's origins. If this is something we deem as problematic, why not solve it at the source by having the service (i.e. Twitter) identify the images that are posted an…

When you reverse-searched on Google Images, did you notice that their captions often distorted the facts or outright lied?

I think that's the bigger story here: it's not that "new media" or "kids these days" don't care about attribution for the sake of giving credit. The photos aren't attributed because it would be easier to find their contexts. If people know the facts, the account would be less interesting and therefore less popular.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#42

Post by virtuabhi »

digitalengineer wrote: post #4

This: "The audiences that Di Petta and Cameron have built are created with the work of photographers who they don't pay or even credit . They don't provide sources for the photographs or the captions that accompany them. Sometimes they get stuff wrong and/or post copyrighted photographs. " Combined with this: "I'm sure the majority of photographers would be glad to have their work seen by the massives." Nothing 'new…

Shouldn't this be considered "fair use"? A bunch of guys find some pictures on the internet. These pictures are not the originals but low-res jpegs. The pictures are saved on their machines (by the browser). Then the pictures are uploaded to Twitter. The source/photographer is provided with every picture (if info. is available). I don't understand how photographers are losing here? They are getting free publicity from the pictures which were already accessible to everyone.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#43

Post by burntsushi »

archgrove wrote: post #40
burntsushi wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Otherwise, you're just an anarchist, burning the system down and denying any contribution to the people who have committed to a certain lifestyle on the guarantees currently provided by society. This is ridiculous. Believing that IP is unjust is not the same as "denying any contribution."

It is if you use your belief to say "Well then, I won't pay them what they've asked". Too many people seem to think a "belief" is justification for breaking the law (AKA "agreement made by society"). A belief is fine - fantastic even. All big change comes from passionate beliefs. However, we have a system in place for affecting this change. It's "discuss in public fora, create political will, and change the law". Or…

It is a mistake to think that people against IP are just a bunch of kids ripping off content for free from [insert favorite bittorrent tracker]. For me personally, I pay for much of the media I consume.

My concerns with IP are more wide reaching, particularly with respect to the medical and agriculture industries. (And more personally, the software industry.) The book I cited, "Information Feudalism," chronicles this to a (horrifying) extent. In broad terms, countries rich in IP use it to extort developing countries.

I recognize the OP of this article sets the context with youthful apathy that can be annoying, but you shouldn't assume that the only criticisms of IP are selfishly trite.

To a secondary point, I don't think civil disobedience is a bad thing. But I agree that claiming civil disobedience while downloading the latest Game of Thrones episode is a bit incredulous.

> It is if you use your belief to say "Well then, I won't pay them what they've asked".

It seemed to me that you were equating "lack of IP" with "content creators aren't rewarded from the fruits of their labor." I was stating that this was a false equivalency. A lack of IP merely means that there is no body of law enforcing the notion of ownership over ideas.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#44

Post by evan_ »

smackfu wrote: post #30
evan_ wrote: post #23

Start re-posting their tweets on a halfway-popular account and see how quickly they learn about copyright.

But all they care about is the follower count. Once it hits a million, they can sell off this account to someone who wants to monetize it. I mean, they have no real attraction to "History in Pics" as a constant, or to any particular post. They just care about it as something that people seem to like to follow. If someone else rips off their content, I doubt that would have any impact at all.

You might have a point about the "History in Pics" account, I guess you would have to be competing with a newer account and outpace its follower count- or have an "Ad free History in Pics" account that catches traction or something. Or maybe they really wouldn't care at all, I don't know.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#45

Post by brucehart »

I stopped following accounts like this because of their promotion tactics. They retweet stuff from other accounts and then delete it 15 minutes later. If you look at the feed before subscribing, it looks like it is a bunch of interesting photos. Once you start following them, you see these lower quality retweets at the top of your feed that are deleted as soon as they start to get pushed down on subscriber timelines.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#47

Post by digitalengineer »

archgrove wrote: post #21
burntsushi wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Theft plain and simple. Well, no, not plain and simple. At the worst, it's copyright infringement. You may think this is a pedantic correction, and from your point of view, maybe it is. But it isn't for people who see intellectual property as unjust.

This trope is getting exceedingly tired, on par with the "taxation is theft", "atheism is a religion" and "Linux should be called GNU/Linux" brigades that often crop up in the appropriate discussions. Theft and "steal" have long been used outside of the OED definitions; I can be a "thief of time", "steal an idea", "steal a base" and so forth. "Theft" and "steal" are appropriate words for the behaviour of people who h…

Remember their entire motive for doing this is to profit. Once there are enough followers the product (twitter handle) is sold off. So they take photo's (actual products of others) and run with them.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#49

Post by fr0sty »

brucehart wrote: post #45

I stopped following accounts like this because of their promotion tactics. They retweet stuff from other accounts and then delete it 15 minutes later. If you look at the feed before subscribing, it looks like it is a bunch of interesting photos. Once you start following them, you see these lower quality retweets at the top of your feed that are deleted as soon as they start to get pushed down on subscriber timelines.

If you aren't un-following merely on principle, you can turn off re-tweets per followee. I find the feature very useful.

Re: The Two Teenagers Who Run the Popular Twitter Feed @HistoryInPics

#50

Post by ronaldx »

burntsushi wrote: post #26
archgrove wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This trope is getting exceedingly tired, on par with the "taxation is theft", "atheism is a religion" and "Linux should be called GNU/Linux" brigades that often crop up in the appropriate discussions. Theft and "steal" have long been used outside of the OED definitions; I can be a "thief of time", "steal an idea", "steal a base" and so forth. "Theft" and "steal" are appropriate words for the behaviour of people who h…

It's not just my distinction; it's a distinction made in courts too. The law is quite clear. Copyright infringement is not theft. > And, from my perspective, something is actually lost, that cannot be replaced. The right of the IP creator to be repaid by the person who grabbed it. Well, yes... Supposing that IP rights should exist! Instead of getting dragged into a big long debate, I'll just give you two sources. The…

We can argue about whether IP rights should exist, but I see this as a separate point. IP rights do exist.

The photographers have created and published their work under the expectation that existing IP law will be upheld.

Post reply on HN