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

Google Images Restored

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 175 posts

Re: Google Images Restored

#41

Post by matttb »

gkoberger wrote: post #26
markdown wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getty charges $1000 for public domain photos. Fuck 'em! EDIT: They also fraudulently claim to own public domain photos and legally threaten people who use them, demanding payment.

I don't understand your point. If you hate copyright and IP, then you inherently also have to believe Getty should be allowed to take public domain photos (or someone else's photos) and sell them.

I'd never heard of this before so I searched it and the first result turned up this[0] (see lines 2-4/Exhibit A). Big jump from selling public domain images to seeking out payment for public domain images.

[0] https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3001353/Filed-Com...

Re: Google Images Restored

#43

Post by _underfl0w_ »

michaelmrose wrote: post #31

I really like this in theory but if an adware company someday buys your addon I could be compromised. It's easier to use bing image search which has been better than google for images for a while now.

TFA is a github page, friend. If you truly care about compromise as stated, just build the add-on from source. No reason to point to nonexistent future threat vectors.

Re: Google Images Restored

#45

Post by markdown »

gkoberger wrote: post #26
markdown wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getty charges $1000 for public domain photos. Fuck 'em! EDIT: They also fraudulently claim to own public domain photos and legally threaten people who use them, demanding payment.

I don't understand your point. If you hate copyright and IP, then you inherently also have to believe Getty should be allowed to take public domain photos (or someone else's photos) and sell them.

> If you hate copyright and IP

Are you responding to someone else? Wrong thread? Because I haven't expressed that sentiment here.

> you inherently also have to believe Getty should be allowed to take public domain photos (or someone else's photos) and sell them.

Are you responding to someone else? Wrong thread? Because I never said they shouldn't be allowed to profit off public domain photos.

There is profit, and then there's just fucking people over. $1000 for a photo they didn't take and didn't pay for is just disgusting. All it does is restrict access to historical photos to 99% of the world, allowing only the very rich access to this window into our past.

Re: Google Images Restored

#47

Post by Xelbair »

gkoberger wrote: post #16
errantspark wrote: post #11

Fuck Getty Images. Fuck IP law. Fuck copyright. All that shit needs a massive refactor. I can't bear to think about how much harm has been done to software and human reality in general by lawyers and MBAs seeking to extract the maximum amount of value from things. I'm glad things like this exist, but so sad that they need to. EDIT: and as one commenter astutely pointed out, fuck Pintrest too, a perfect example of the…

What's wrong with Getty? They spend a lot of money to take pictures, and other people pay money to use them. How would you change their business model? EDIT: I hadn't realized that Getty is the reason for the removal of the view image button! I stand by my comment in general, however I do think removing that button is crappy.

What's worse - instead of fixing their shit, they bloody sue google.

Re: Google Images Restored

#48

Post by NoSorryCannot »

_underfl0w_ wrote: post #40
101008 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am interested in your point of view. Care to expand?

I'm not the parent poster but I see where they're coming from - form used to purely _follow_ function in computer UI/UX (as in most engineering fields) but now it's been delegated to "creatives" who, by virtue of their skill set, put form first. Overall "betterness" is subjective, but speaking as someone who uses a computer as a tool I can honestly say I'd prefer it to function pragmatically than look pretty, if the…

I'm not sure I see any reason to expect or believe that engineers would make good ui/ux decisions. It's not clear to me that choices that are simple for engineering are necessarily even aligned with ultimately being functional.

A good ui/ux specialist will be interested in reducing error rates and improving ease of discovery and use through affordances and good organization of information and actions. Obviously other business interest may conflict with those goals but those same interests are capable of corrupting engineering as well.

And I don't think ui/ux work is as recent as this is all making it sound. Perhaps it is more common now even for orgs where their bread and butter isn't software but ultimately making tools useful and safe and accessible predates software entirely.

Re: Google Images Restored

#49

Post by michaelmrose »

_underfl0w_ wrote: post #43
michaelmrose wrote: post #31

I really like this in theory but if an adware company someday buys your addon I could be compromised. It's easier to use bing image search which has been better than google for images for a while now.

TFA is a github page, friend. If you truly care about compromise as stated, just build the add-on from source. No reason to point to nonexistent future threat vectors.

Do you remember Stylish? It was a very popular firefox/chrome addon with 2 million users which was sold to an ad company that started using it to siphon off users data.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/styli...

The threat isn't nonexistent and having the source doesn't help as much as you might imagine. Most people can't read the source in any meaningful way and those that can might still trivially miss something malicious. In practice its only as safe as the meaningful analysis by skilled hands makes it in actuality. Realistically you would be lucky if someone notices several months after it started siphoning off your data and only if its egregious enough to get it kicked off of the extensions store.

Re: Google Images Restored

#50

Post by aaron695 »

PirateBay for images is back!

Not complaining, I love using the PirateBay to steal. I also don't makeup reasons I do it. It's for theft, because getting something of value for free feels good.

Post reply on HN