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

No Instagram, no privacy

blog.wouterjanleys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–126 of 126 posts

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#121

Post by mock-possum »

ryandrake wrote: post #98
rootnod3 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people being offended could just act like an adult. If you want to go out with friend A but don't want friend B to see it for whatever reason (maybe B has a feud with A), then that is a thing between B and A, but not you. I think the whole point of the OP comment is to just go with it. If you don't flauntingly advertise it, it is not your fault. But in a very social media centric world, even if you are just a par…

As someone who doesn't use any social media, this whole thread sound exhausting to have to worry about. "I shouldn't post X because Y might be offended at Z..." Holy crap, I feel vindicated for my decision to entirely stay off of this drama machine.

No, the drama machine is people. Social media is just the medium.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#122

Post by immibis »

steveBK123 wrote: post #118
immibis wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just normal politics though? If you publicize that you have an interest in X, and you're on the board, and someone wants X from the board, isn't it normal they'd approach you first? Were you trying to require them to use a more formal process? The smaller the number of people involved, the less formal the processes yet (no matter how much bureaucracy you try to drown them in - in a small political system, drow…

It was a third appeal to violate some building bylaws so they could make modification for personal use and exclusive benefit of communal property. They thought I just might like what they were doing and approve it the third time lol. edit to add more context: On condo boards you deal with a lot of self interested strong willed people who have unreasonable demands & complaints like - "why can't I just put a 1000 gallo…

Did the first denial say "no, now go away" or did it say "no, because water is much heavier than most people think and it will collapse the roof, so you need an engineering report"?

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#123

Post by JCattheATM »

johnklos wrote: post #11

People who know me know that even though I'm very public (my handle and my email address are my name, for instance), I care about privacy, and therefore it's unacceptable to post abount me on corporate social media without asking permission, just as they also know to not name or tag me. People who post without asking don't know me well enough to name or tag me, so I don't care. If someone posted and named / tagged me…

> If someone posted and named / tagged me without asking, I'd have a serious conversation with them about it.

Ultimately you can't stop this though, at all. You say people who don't know you don't tag you, but it just takes a friend of a friend in a group to do so, and then dismiss your concerns and not care, and you have no recourse to do anything.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#124

Post by II2II »

timcobb wrote: post #108
II2II wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip side: if I were to attend an event featuring Richard Stallman, I would rather it have a no-photos policy. I am interested in many of his ideas, but I have no desire to be associated with his ideas in their entirety or any public figure. Unfortunately, too many people believe that A implies B. I also hate drama, and would much rather lead a quiet life as a person no one likes than an interesting life who s…

People will dislike you arbitrarily anyway. Can't get around that it seems in my experience, but maybe I'm bad at laying low

True. Maybe dislike was a poor choice of words on my part, but I can't think of anything more suitable. The main thing I want to avoid is drama. If someone dislikes me and that dislike doesn't go any further than letting me know, that's fine. It's their choice. When their actions start affecting my life, that's not fine.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#125

Post by immibis »

chaoskitty wrote: post #93
SoftTalker wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't immediately start hosting your own email on a brand new domain especially if you're using a free or very low-cost VPS provider. Pay a bit more for a better reputation provider. Use a domain you've owned for a while. Set up all SPF, DKIM, and DMARC properly. Or just pay fastmail to do it for you.

You're conflating a few different issues: the newness of a domain, and the quality and cost of of your VPS. Some email providers don't like brand new domains, yes, but if a domain is brand new, nobody is going to immediately start using it for mission critical things. That's just common sense, although now I want to buy a domain to see how much of an issue this really is. The cost and quality of a VPS means very litt…

Perhaps IP reputation became less important than domain reputation when SPF and SKIM became things.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#126

Post by immibis »

timcobb wrote: post #108
II2II wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip side: if I were to attend an event featuring Richard Stallman, I would rather it have a no-photos policy. I am interested in many of his ideas, but I have no desire to be associated with his ideas in their entirety or any public figure. Unfortunately, too many people believe that A implies B. I also hate drama, and would much rather lead a quiet life as a person no one likes than an interesting life who s…

People will dislike you arbitrarily anyway. Can't get around that it seems in my experience, but maybe I'm bad at laying low

Are we even sure they're people? Something like 90% of Reddit content is now LLM bots.
Post reply on HN