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

Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

imgurinc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 476 posts

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#431

Post by shrimp_emoji »

LinuxBender wrote: post #428
mjr00 wrote: 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 .

P2P?

No shitty middlemen that need $$$ for server lettuce?

Nah; not retarded enough.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#432

Post by LinuxBender »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #431
LinuxBender wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

P2P? No shitty middlemen that need $$$ for server lettuce? Nah; not retarded enough.

Probably not P2P as people could not embed images to it. I think it would need to be a simple web server that can do HTTP and SSL. Maybe NGinx or Apache and certbot to get HTTPS working.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#433

Post by dt3ft »

adad95 wrote: post #97

With this change and Reddit removing NSFW content from the API, at the same time. I think both sites will be way less used. And another competitor will appear quickly. Look like they want became irrelevant very quickly. Tumblr and Only Fans tried and falied. one became forgotten and the other had to say sorry was a mistake.

I’m building flingup.com, but I never thought about allowing nsfw communities. Perhaps I should rethink and welcome this type of content.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#434

Post by romwell »

hparadiz wrote: post #201
Kiro wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely. I don't use main reddit at all, but on mobile there are no good alternatives now when i.reddit.com is gone and third party clients being restricted. Saying "just use old reddit" is not sufficient for me at least.

The new reddit is so bad I'm sort of shocked it still exists. I really wonder what goes through people's heads when they build these things that are universally hated.

>I really wonder what goes through people's heads when they build these things that are universally hated.

Oh, they aren't universally hated.

Most of reddit users have only seen the "new" interface, so they don't know what they're missing.

And when they find out, they're already conditioned to use the "new" UI, so switching is difficult.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#435

Post by shrimp_emoji »

hparadiz wrote: post #201
Kiro wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely. I don't use main reddit at all, but on mobile there are no good alternatives now when i.reddit.com is gone and third party clients being restricted. Saying "just use old reddit" is not sufficient for me at least.

The new reddit is so bad I'm sort of shocked it still exists. I really wonder what goes through people's heads when they build these things that are universally hated.

$$$$

The new UI enforces age gating via sign-in (switch to the old UI, and you can get away with "Continue"), which is better for engagement.

The new UI is mobile friendly, which is WAY better for engagement. (Most users are mobile users, even though mobile devices are worse than desktop PCs in every way except convenience.)

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#436

Post by Dylan16807 »

celsoazevedo wrote: post #374
pmoriarty wrote: post #265

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.

If the images go away when the user stops paying it doesn't solve the problem very well, though.

If I expect a typical image to be 1MB and get 10000 views, I could prepay 30 years of cloudflare R2 hosting with one penny. That's the kind of model I'd want when ads aren't an option. But it's really hard to build something around microtransactions like that.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#437

Post by nemothekid »

hbn wrote: post #369
nemothekid wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge graveyard of image hosts - it's not for lack of trying. There are all the pomf.se clones that are community supported (like catbox.moe) which don't even break even from patreon. The problem I see is that once you get even to the scale of a 10th of size of imgur your hosting bills (storage + bandwidth) will cross into the 10s of thousands per month, which would require you to be in the top 1% of Patreo…

Well I was going off what the above parent comment was saying, that recent advances in compression + cheaper hosting should make it more viable. I don't know much about what any of those costs cause I've never run anything that needs a lot of serving costs at scale. So I'm guessing even with that it's still too expensive? On the other hand, I think Imgur also pushed way more traffic upon itself by trying to make itse…

Just staying niche doesn't really solve the problem? That just means any "niche" host that finds itself growing will be forced to shutdown, not much better than what is happening to imgur here.

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#438

Post by stemlord »

hexage1814 wrote: post #294
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Accept header tells you whether the browser is expecting a web page or an image.

In fact you can make the page to send you the damn image, and it supposed to be, if you use some extension to modify your user agent and lies to imgur your are using curl something.

Do you know of such an extension? Tumblr and a few other sites do this too and I've been looking for a client side solution for years now

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#439

Post by boneitis »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #32

I'm surprised imgur still exists. It's been years since reddit started doing their own image hosting, and that was basically the only thing anyone used it for.

I'm both surprised and not, given how much user blocking they already employ.

For months now, I've been unable to view photos on Imgur. Only recently, I finally realized their "over capacity" error was their cop-out for "we don't want to serve your IP blocks". (Yes, I am primarily on VPN.)

Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content

#440

Post by soerxpso »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #367
govolckurself wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tale as old as time. 1. "We need a better image host!" 2. Makes new image host. 3. Uh oh, hosting costs money. 4. Ads. 5. Lawsuits because illegal stuff. Uh oh, lawyers cost money. 6. "We need a better image host!"

The image hosting part is half the story, "having a community that was predominantly fun" was the other half. But they've gone out of their way to make sure the site's a hellscape shithole without adblocking with every possible action getting gamified. So ironically the only thing that's left of the original pretty great website is the image hosting part. EULA notwithstanding (because as much as people yell, NSFW mak…

> because as much as people yell, NSFW makes up barely any of the front page content

This is a really important point. From what I can see, Imgur doesn't have a porn community, it just has a lot of porn because it's used as an image host by outside communities. Porn is probably a net drain on profit for them, since they make their revenue off of people who use Imgur itself, not from servicing direct image links posted on Reddit.

Post reply on HN