No Instagram, no privacy • Hacker News Board

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#41

Post by w29UiIm2Xz » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:27 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #21

paxys wrote: post #4

"I went on a weekend trip and didn't invite friend A, so I hope friend B keeps it a secret and doesn't tell anyone I was there" is the kind of social dynamic that people grow out of in high school. If you are having trouble with it as an adult then it isn't really Instagram's fault. People talk to each other and share stuff, and sometimes they talk about you, both online and offline. Just live your life without being…

Not really. It hurts people's feelings to find out they weren't invited to something they thought they should have been. Protecting feelings and smoothing out awkward social dynamics are the the category of "very adult." As a more general example, you wouldn't talk about a happy hour you were going to after work with people who weren't invited/aren't invited/you wouldn't invite. I believe every sitcom on the planet h…

It's both things. Being an adult means not being overly bothered if you weren't invited, and it's also very adult to prevent the situation where the uninvited friend doesn't find out, out of concern for their feelings. Both are simply approaching it from different ends.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#42

Post by bobismyuncle » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:27 PM UTC

mjevans wrote: post #14

Should it be allowed / legal to 'tag' people that are not part of a service? I might agree that 'celebrities' and leaders of larger organizations are 'public figures' and thus if there's a reasonable public interest it should be allowed to tag them, probably with a publishing delay for security. However individuals? Random citizens who aren't part of a platform and cannot manage their data? IMO the default should be…

Tagging will be redundant pretty soon with facial recognition...

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#43

Post by paxys » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:31 PM UTC

lostmsu wrote: post #34

timcobb wrote: post #22

This reminded me of the time ~10 years ago I was at an event featuring Richard Stallman, and he started by say that no one was allowed to post photos of him on FB. This was to a room of hundreds of people, mostly hackers. I thought, "damn, if there's an uphill battle somewhere, this guy will find it!"

In US, if that was a private event, his request is legally binding.

Unless you agreed to the terms before buying your ticket, no, it isn't legally binding.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#44

Post by zombitack » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:32 PM UTC

After being friends with public people, I got in the habit of asking people in pictures before I post, regardless of if they're on Instagram or not. And I NEVER post kid pictures. I find these rules should be obvious to most people. I'll even ask my wife first, who is always just about to post the same set of pictures I am. It's the decent thing to do.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#45

Post by malfist » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:32 PM UTC

lostmsu wrote: post #34

timcobb wrote: post #22

This reminded me of the time ~10 years ago I was at an event featuring Richard Stallman, and he started by say that no one was allowed to post photos of him on FB. This was to a room of hundreds of people, mostly hackers. I thought, "damn, if there's an uphill battle somewhere, this guy will find it!"

In US, if that was a private event, his request is legally binding.

Unless they signed NDAs to get into the room with him, it's not. You're welcome to share the legal code, or a court case that proves me wrong though.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#46

Post by chrisweekly » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:33 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #28

AndriyKunitsyn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you have any problems with Gmail not trusting your server and moving your letters to spam?

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.

Strong rec to use Fastmail; it's a fantastic, reliable, inexpensive service w/ excellent performance and UX.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#47

Post by 2Gkashmiri » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:35 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #28

AndriyKunitsyn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you have any problems with Gmail not trusting your server and moving your letters to spam?

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.

I disagree. I followed luke smiths video on email hosting and adapted to miab and I was up and running. Checked the IP for problems beforehand. Have had to request a different IP once.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#48

Post by lvass » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:36 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #43

lostmsu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In US, if that was a private event, his request is legally binding.

Unless you agreed to the terms before buying your ticket, no, it isn't legally binding.

What if entering that room was free as in beer?

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#49

Post by kube-system » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:36 PM UTC

firefoxd wrote: post #6

The social etiquette argument has been thrown away with the bath water. You are now the weirdo with something to hide when you are not on Instagram or Tiktok. The term I like is Social Cooling, the subtle way in which people change their behavior because they are both present in person and online. Have you ever heard some use the term "unalive" in person? It's as if they are protecting themselves from an algorithm, a…

> Have you ever heard some use the term "unalive" in person? It's as if they are protecting themselves from an algorithm, as if the conversation will be posted online.

Nobody is being socially pressured to avoid the word "dead/died/killed" in person, that's just an illustration of slang perpetuating.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#50

Post by rootnod3 » Mon, May 05, 2025, 5:37 PM UTC

alwa wrote: post #9

paxys wrote: post #4

"I went on a weekend trip and didn't invite friend A, so I hope friend B keeps it a secret and doesn't tell anyone I was there" is the kind of social dynamic that people grow out of in high school. If you are having trouble with it as an adult then it isn't really Instagram's fault. People talk to each other and share stuff, and sometimes they talk about you, both online and offline. Just live your life without being…

There’s value in grace. For all sorts of reasons you might be right to do things that make other people feel bad. That’s no reason to rub their nose in it. What’s the virtue in offending people when you could instead be kind? I know one woman who is having a baby shower, and I know another woman who recently dealt with the loss of her child. It’s not “secrecy” to celebrate the baby shower and avoid bringing it up wit…

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 participant in a picture can feel like "flaunting it" to 3rd parties.