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

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#231

Post by dragonwriter »

eddiewithzato wrote: post #184
SamPatt wrote: post #18

I don't know the whole story, but this seems very genuine. It echoes a sentiment I imagine many people my age feel, where the magic of the early internet we witnessed during our coming of age feels threatened. I feel for him, and hope he's able to move onto other projects which aren't as stressful.

The magic died when majority of the population got access thanks to the iPhone and androids that came.

> The magic died when majority of the population got access thanks to the iPhone and androids that came.

...for those too young to think the magic died with Eternal September.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#232

Post by RakutenSatori »

yawpitch wrote: post #112
silenced_trope wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let the legal process play out. I'm not a fan of this journalist "ambushing" the founder at his property and staying outside of it until he gets some answers. "He has all the blinds closed" - right. Let a judge determine whether the founder is in the wrong and needs to provide answers. Sorry maybe it's the aspergers in me but I'm generally not a fan of these self-anointed judge, jury, and executioners performing publ…

So you’re a fan of judges doing their jobs, but not a fan of journalists doing theirs? Tracking down and trying to talk to those your sources have accused of wrongdoing to try and get their side of the story and to get them to speak on the record is kind of literally Investigative Reporting 101, and has been for actual centuries now.

If they were journalists they would know something about journalism ethics.

Asking loaded questions and trying to aggressively ambush you is definitely not "getting the other side of the story".

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#233

Post by [deleted] »

johntiger1 wrote: post #66
cortesoft wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that the "magical period" seems to be determined by your age. For me, the internet has already lost its magic by the time the mid 2000s came around, well before Omegle came out in 2009. For me, the magical period was the early 90s, when I was growing up. In 15 years, are people going to be talking about the current internet as the time when the magic was there? It seems more about the magic of c…

Yep, each generation thinks they're special. But I think the early internet was different since it had literally just went from 0->1

[deleted]

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#234

Post by stalinford »

JSavageOne wrote: post #130
willsmith72 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how exactly was she "coerced"? Yeah no this is a terrible take. She was coerced by being an 11 year old talking to a grown adult. How do you think she was coerced?

Well that's the question I'm asking, and you didn't answer the question > coerce - persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats. What was the threat? Why did she oblige? Why didn't she just block him?

This was the threat: "Once he had coerced Alice into sending intimate images, Fordyce convinced her that she was complicit in making and sharing child sexual abuse material. Fearing arrest, she kept everything secret from her family and friends."

And it is a pretty credible threat: https://slate.com/technology/2019/08/maryland-sk-court-case-... https://www.wnyc.org/story/9114-sexting-teens-legal-straits-...

Curiously enough, no one even thinks of holding the government/legal system responsible.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#235

Post by silenced_trope »

yawpitch wrote: post #112
silenced_trope wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let the legal process play out. I'm not a fan of this journalist "ambushing" the founder at his property and staying outside of it until he gets some answers. "He has all the blinds closed" - right. Let a judge determine whether the founder is in the wrong and needs to provide answers. Sorry maybe it's the aspergers in me but I'm generally not a fan of these self-anointed judge, jury, and executioners performing publ…

So you’re a fan of judges doing their jobs, but not a fan of journalists doing theirs? Tracking down and trying to talk to those your sources have accused of wrongdoing to try and get their side of the story and to get them to speak on the record is kind of literally Investigative Reporting 101, and has been for actual centuries now.

When judges do their job, you the accused have due process and legal representation.

I specified my issue (aspergers) for a reason. I would need legal and competent representation if I were accused of something.

We know from people that have actually consented to be in the public sphere (politicians, performers, etc) that even denying an accusation against you still leaves you a pariah with the scarlet letter, to be ostracized in some cases.

Smearing and destroying a person extra-judicially with no "burden of proof" to convict isn't something I'm okay with.

If there is legitimate wrongdoing of some kind, an investigation, carried out by the designated representatives (police, detectives, prosecutors) who are paid by our tax dollars and not by advertisers or the wealthy is what's preferable and actually representative.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#236

Post by intrasight »

tyg13 wrote: post #85
Mechanical9 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really see what aspect of this situation involves a false sense of victimhood, unless you are referring to the multimillionaire founder who is unwilling to add age verification to their website.

How is age verification supposed to work? I don't suppose users of the site are going to provide legal documents just to use it. It's tantamount to shutting it down. I ask because there was a similar moral outrage around age verification for access to porn sites that I recall being a big issue a while ago. I don't recall exactly how it played out in court, but it appeared to amount to nothing, which I can't help but…

It's supposed to work perfectly. That was easy. Next?

But in all seriousness, age verification will soon be a legal reality. It's only "hard" because it's optional. When the government makes it required, they'll also have to make it possible - or those laws won't stand up in court. It'll probably require government issued digital IDs and MFA hardware.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#237

Post by THENATHE »

Can't say I didn't see this coming... Omegle today is very different than historically. I remember when I was much younger I would find a bot or a person just looking for sexting maybe once in 5. Now it seems that the genuine "wanna make a friend" people are 1-100. It is wild how it turned into just a horny site, and it makes me sad that it never had the opportunity for a resurgence.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#238

Post by dragonwriter »

ethanbond wrote: post #190
xmprt wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's something to be said of an overall trend toward more consumption, less production I think this couldn't be further from the truth. You could argue that the production has been heavily centralized, but I think today more than ever we see kids in their early teens making videos on YouTube/TikTok, etc. It's different from other people's childhoods where you'd make geocities website or customize your myspace pa…

I think TikTok is a substantial aberration on this trigger trend. It’s been great (as a non-user) seeing legitimately funny and creative stuff coming from that platform. It’ll be interesting to see if it stays that way or it does go the way (at least IMO) of YouTube and Instagram: quite commercialized. Note: All of this based on impressions/vibes, would be keen to hear any stats if people around have ‘em on hand!

TikTok is extremely commercialized; even a lot of the "good" content is extremely carefully crafted part of the acquisition funnel for commercial activities.

I'm not knocking people liking it -- its like people liking SuperBowl ads; just because something is the very much marketing content doesn't mean its not fun and entertaining. But, the idea that becoming "quite commercialized" is a potential way it might go downhill in the future seems to miss that it is very much already there.

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#239

Post by defrost »

JSavageOne wrote: post #130
willsmith72 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how exactly was she "coerced"? Yeah no this is a terrible take. She was coerced by being an 11 year old talking to a grown adult. How do you think she was coerced?

Well that's the question I'm asking, and you didn't answer the question > coerce - persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats. What was the threat? Why did she oblige? Why didn't she just block him?

[flagged]

Re: Omegle 2009-2023

#240

Post by hypeatei »

lazide wrote: post #211
hypeatei wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Golf also requires a membership and equipment to play, as well as physically being there. Omegle is (was?) a free online service with no signup required.

Which requires a computer, internet connection (subscription based!), and actually going to the website and interacting with it on an ongoing basis. No one is ‘accidentally’ using Omeagle, anymore than they would ‘accidentally’ go golfing.

Yeah, but this is from the site operators perspective. How are you not bound to have abuse everyday on a platform with such low barrier to entry?

An internet connection is a lot more ubiquitous than a golf membership.

Post reply on HN