Live data from Hacker News

Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

imgurinc.com

421–430 of 476 posts

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the thing entirely. So much of the NSFW content is abusive. The HN crowd is mostly safe from such attacks so this is a real blindspot.

I'd be more sympathetic to the abusive/revenge porn argument if these companies didn't keep applying the same rules to drawn images.

Why? Aren't you falling victim to false equivalency? One argument can be valid in certain cases but not in others.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a narrowing of the Overton window, not any one specific topic being accepted in public discourse.

Despite the fact that the Victorian era was quite conservative? So your point doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We're moving to a neo-victorian(more conservative/prude) era that is also shutting down Conservative speech?

It's not about the content, it's about the restrictions to a dogma

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

paid-only no thanks

I don't have an opinion about the service, but that's why image hosts always die or end up like this. They have ongoing costs and almost no one wants to pay.

Aren't there some distributed, peer-to-peer networks that could be used for this purpose?

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be more sympathetic to the abusive/revenge porn argument if these companies didn't keep applying the same rules to drawn images.

Why? Aren't you falling victim to false equivalency? One argument can be valid in certain cases but not in others.

It's that I don't believe it's the motivation of these companies, even though that argument is valid in a vacuum.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Aren't you falling victim to false equivalency? One argument can be valid in certain cases but not in others.

It's that I don't believe it's the motivation of these companies, even though that argument is valid in a vacuum.

That's true, broken clocks are sometimes right and all that.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Infamously u/Unidan, a very popular figure on r/askscience posting high-quality answers to biology questions, was banned from Reddit when it was revealed that he used alt accounts to upvote himself/downvote those he was arguing against. Such a shame that he felt the need to resort to something so stupid.

It wasn't stupid. It's quite likely that he would have been stuck down in the noise like so many other high quality Reddit posters except that he realized early on that just a handful of early upvotes makes all of the difference to Reddit's algorithm. The Reddit algorithm is seemingly designed to snowball content, so if you want to rake in the worthless karma reliably you need alts.

I’m not so sure. Many other "household names" on askscience seem to be highly upvoted, apparently without shenanigans (but who knows?!) Even I have several 1000+ karma answers there, and many more 100+ ones and I’m a nobody. There’s also simply not that much competition on askscience! If you’re consistently able to write good, a-few-paragraph answers to questions in a particular field, and are also available for discussion and followup questions, it’s not that difficult to become commonly recognized and reap a lot of karma there without having to compete against others.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#428
post #5

Tumblr 2.0 incoming? It's a not-so-unspoken fact that a lot of social media platforms are popular because they have tons of pornography. Reddit, Twitter, OnlyFans (more openly) and (until now) Imgur all have massive communities around explicit content. Even Twitch and YouTube are hugely successful as ways for OnlyFans creators to drive users to their explicit content. Going to be very interesting to see if imgur drop…

Hopefully also more people just hosting their own tiny static image servers, RasPi's, VM's, etc... maybe.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a narrowing of the Overton window, not any one specific topic being accepted in public discourse.

Despite the fact that the Victorian era was quite conservative? So your point doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We're moving to a neo-victorian(more conservative/prude) era that is also shutting down Conservative speech?

Yes, it has absolutely nothing to do with the exact ideology and everything to do with a narrowing of what is publicly acceptable. For an example, compare any hollywood comedy from 10 years ago to one from today. So it's neo-victorian in the sense that we have become quite prudish about what we allow in public, but nothing to do with exactly what we allow, which of course, would have made the actual Victorians blush.
Post reply on HN