Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#401

Post by saagarjha » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:21 PM UTC

basch wrote: post #284

giarc wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it's similar to music, where you can play a short piece without compensating the artist? Since most gifs are <5 seconds, it's not content stealing.

it is still stealing[1]. fair use is an affirmative defense, where you say "yes i stole it, but the government should not protect the content owner from me," similar to "yes i injured them, but it was self defense and they do not deserve compensation." [1]intellectual property violations are not theft in the strictest sense of the word, they don't remove the original. stealing in this context is colloquial.

Stealing is illegal, as is assault, and you are not convicted of assault in cases of self-defense. Similarly, calling fair use "government sanctioned stealing" is a bit of a stretch.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#402

Post by saagarjha » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:22 PM UTC

moufestaphio wrote: post #146

M2Ys4U wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if they do I'm sure they'll have enough cash to dry their eyes with

I'm pretty sure there is a woody harrelson gif for that

There is: https://giphy.com/gifs/94EQmVHkveNck

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#403

Post by saagarjha » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:23 PM UTC

marmshallow wrote: post #68

xoxoy wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It’s Maybe even higher signal than the shady VPN they bought

Both are extremely valuable. Giphy data would include a wider user-base, but Onavo has much deeper data (all of someone's mobile data traffic, which would include seeing what someone is searching on Giphy and in which app)

Giphy wouldn't be banned on the App Store, though.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#404

Post by flunhat » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #400

timdiggerm wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it worked out great for the Instagram guys, right?

Maybe..? I can imagine an alternate 2020 where an independent Instagram is growing like a weed and the founders are much more wealthy.

Most people on this site couldn't imagine it back then:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3817850

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#405

Post by chispamed » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:30 PM UTC

Aeolun wrote: post #394

Drakim wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While you aren't wrong, in this day and age it's not enough to simply pay. Even if you pay for something, you are still the product being sold. Why would a company leave money on the table, when violating people's privacy is profitable and there is no backlash?

Ethics?

In a society which doesn't care enough and a legal system that doesn't punish unethical behaviour any company tapping unethical revenue streams in addition to the ethical ones will have a competitive advantage and given otherwise similar conditions eventually outperform ethical companies. Once a sole actor goes down that path it puts a lot of pressure on all other actors to throw ethics overboard as well as otherwise their company's survival and in extension their livelihood will be threatened. This is why we can't just rely on market forces sorting everything out, consumers making decision, etc. but have to actively legislate to protect our privacy and personal rights.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#406

Post by justapassenger » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:34 PM UTC

Drakim wrote: post #269

tantalor wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely is cynical. Just another "If you're not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold."

While you aren't wrong, in this day and age it's not enough to simply pay. Even if you pay for something, you are still the product being sold. Why would a company leave money on the table, when violating people's privacy is profitable and there is no backlash?

It's not this day and age. Analytics and data mining of customers data is as old as business. 2000 years ago merchants were also tracking who's buying what, in what city, what time of the year, etc.

It's waaaaay more efficient nowadays and way more creepy, but it's not a new invention.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#407

Post by smegger001 » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:37 PM UTC

anon73044 wrote: post #336

artificial wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah, great anaology. Pretty crazy that 2chan/4chan popularized the reaction gif.

and folders full of canned reaction images long before every board supported gifs.... and before that, plaintext emoticons... ಠ_ಠ

if only more system would leave my plain text emotes alone an not try to convert it to a emoji

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#408

Post by meIias » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:43 PM UTC

gizmodo59 wrote: post #341

nine_k wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at it as at a bad but addictive habit. Hundreds of millions of smokers do harm their health, and through it their own and their neighbors' wealth. But quitting is indeed hard.

I'd argue a gif sent to someone during a heated conversation can make it light and end up funny. This goes for anything that anyone uses. I wouldn't compare this with smoking though.

You know what else could have the same effect? the right set of words. those are untraceable and they take up little bandwidth.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#409

Post by stuartd » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:46 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #183

Freak_NL wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't grok this trend at all. All these replies in the form of memes make me feel like I'm in the Darmok episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation. I'm grateful communication on MatterMost at my company has not seen the need for reaction gifs emerge; the wildest thing we have is a custom emoji of a dancing banana.

“Grok” is actually a cultural reference; it is a made-up word from a very famous science fiction book. When people use it, it looks the same to me like if they were using “Live long and prosper” in casual conversation.

.. and (as Michael explains on the book) it’s literal meaning in Martian is “drink”, or in other words “to make part of yourself”. It used to really annoy me when people used it to mean “understand”, but I’ve got over that now.

Re: Facebook to Buy Giphy for $400M

#410

Post by basch » Fri, May 15, 2020, 9:48 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #401

basch wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is still stealing[1]. fair use is an affirmative defense, where you say "yes i stole it, but the government should not protect the content owner from me," similar to "yes i injured them, but it was self defense and they do not deserve compensation." [1]intellectual property violations are not theft in the strictest sense of the word, they don't remove the original. stealing in this context is colloquial.

Stealing is illegal, as is assault, and you are not convicted of assault in cases of self-defense. Similarly, calling fair use "government sanctioned stealing" is a bit of a stretch.

That's exactly what it is. Fair use is a government granted exception to intellectual protectionism. The government is the one determining what counts as intellectual property violations, and what counts as exempt from punishment.

Without intellectual property law, you would be free to copy anything. The barrier to copying is the government. The free pass to flaunt their rule, when qualified, is also the government.