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

An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

thecut.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 301 posts

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#61

Post by red_trumpet »

camillomiller wrote: post #38
yosito wrote: post #33

TIL there's a wiki website for foot fetishists. I believe everyone has a right to their own fetishes. Nothing wrong with being into feet. But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. Uploading photos of someone without their consent is wrong. The fact that the purpose is to satisfy a fetish adds an extra layer of creepy. Regardless of how the interviewer…

I do not agree. These are photos posted publicly on Instagram or Facebook. Anyone could see them. This website just aggregates them, but there's technically a live link to these pictures. And no, the fact that someone uploads them to a service whose ToS they have accepted makes no difference. You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them. If those pics were behind e…

I think there are two dimensions. The personal consent one, where I do not agree with your opinion, but that's okay.

On the other hand, copying a picture to another website can also be a copyright infringement.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#62

Post by yosito »

enriquto wrote: post #60
yosito wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I upload photos to Instagram, I am not explicitly consenting to my photos being used for people's fetishes, even privately. I can't stop people from doing what they want privately with my public photos, and I know that, but I still find it morally wrong and disturbing. But I'm not sure that it's legal to republish someone's public Instagram photos on another website either. I'm no legal expert, but I believe it'…

What if it was just text links to the instagram accounts? What if it was iframes?

Again, legal, but not a nice or decent thing to do.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#63

Post by iso1631 »

reedf1 wrote: post #23
iso1631 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are peeping toms hurting people?

Voyeurism is illegal in most places, are you saying that is what this is?

Something being illegal and something hurting someone are two separate things.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#64

Post by yosito »

red_trumpet wrote: post #61
camillomiller wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not agree. These are photos posted publicly on Instagram or Facebook. Anyone could see them. This website just aggregates them, but there's technically a live link to these pictures. And no, the fact that someone uploads them to a service whose ToS they have accepted makes no difference. You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them. If those pics were behind e…

I think there are two dimensions. The personal consent one, where I do not agree with your opinion, but that's okay. On the other hand, copying a picture to another website can also be a copyright infringement.

How would you feel if you walked by a porn shop, and in the window you saw a magazine cover with a photo of you taken from your public social media accounts printed on the cover with the headline, "Hottest people on Instagram to get off to in 2021". Some people may be flattered by that, but many, many people would feel that it was a violation and an assault to their dignity.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#65

Post by mattmanser »

pwdisswordfish0 wrote: post #42

> So why not just look at feet on Instagram, or screenshot them for yourself? What do you get out of posting them to another website? This question has always been weird to me, but apparently there are people who don’t experience “this thing is good, i wish to contribute” or “this has brought me joy, i wish to give something back”. I mean, thankfully there are still enough others that we can have Wikipedia, where you…

It's not something they created.

You're not really contributing, it's more akin to showing off your stamp collection, but with sexual undertones that make many feel uncomfortable.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#66

Post by watwut »

camillomiller wrote: post #38
yosito wrote: post #33

TIL there's a wiki website for foot fetishists. I believe everyone has a right to their own fetishes. Nothing wrong with being into feet. But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. Uploading photos of someone without their consent is wrong. The fact that the purpose is to satisfy a fetish adds an extra layer of creepy. Regardless of how the interviewer…

I do not agree. These are photos posted publicly on Instagram or Facebook. Anyone could see them. This website just aggregates them, but there's technically a live link to these pictures. And no, the fact that someone uploads them to a service whose ToS they have accepted makes no difference. You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them. If those pics were behind e…

It does not work that way, not even legally. Just because a picture is online does not mean anyone is free to distribute it further.

The legality of it depends on copyright and on TOS of places where it was uploaded originally.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#67

Post by contravariant »

tobr wrote: post #45
camillomiller wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not agree. These are photos posted publicly on Instagram or Facebook. Anyone could see them. This website just aggregates them, but there's technically a live link to these pictures. And no, the fact that someone uploads them to a service whose ToS they have accepted makes no difference. You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them. If those pics were behind e…

Strongly disagree, both from a legal and moral point of view. Posting something publicly absolutely does not imply that anyone is free to do whatever they want with it.

Case in point: the existence of copyright licenses.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#68

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

camillomiller wrote: post #38
yosito wrote: post #33

TIL there's a wiki website for foot fetishists. I believe everyone has a right to their own fetishes. Nothing wrong with being into feet. But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. Uploading photos of someone without their consent is wrong. The fact that the purpose is to satisfy a fetish adds an extra layer of creepy. Regardless of how the interviewer…

I do not agree. These are photos posted publicly on Instagram or Facebook. Anyone could see them. This website just aggregates them, but there's technically a live link to these pictures. And no, the fact that someone uploads them to a service whose ToS they have accepted makes no difference. You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them. If those pics were behind e…

>You're posting something publicly? To me that's explicit consent that you want people to see them.

To see them where I posted them. Pictures are an intellectual property of the author, if a person wants other people to spread them, he/she needs to explicitly set the allowing license. Copyright, fair use and such is a hot and nuanced topic, but the bottom line here is that personal pictures getting shared is not what most people expect to happen, understandably so.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#70

Post by Veen »

thendrill wrote: post #39

If the year was 1950 your comment can sound something like: "sure homosexuals don't bother anyone, and I am not saying it is wrong, but regardless of that I am uncomfortable about it and it feels icky and gross to me, and I think it should be wrong..." Do you see the parallel?

A more accurate parallel is posting images from social media to gay porn sites. Nothing is wrong with gayness or foot fetishism, but one can make a reasonable argument against using images for sexual gratification without the subject's knowledge or consent.

Personally, I don't think it can or should be policed. Any image could provoke a sexual response, and there's nothing to do about that short of not publishing images.

(also, some might object to your apparent conflation of homosexuality and fetishism).

Post reply on HN