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

Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 128 posts

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#81

Post by amanaplanacanal »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #55
wordofx wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s such a dumb comment. Back when the British was taking items back to the UK. There were no rules or systems in place for this stuff. You could buy it, trade it, steal it. It didn’t matter. And the UK isn’t the only country to ever do this. Laws were created to resolve/fix/prevent things happening. You can’t blame people for shit that happened before someone decided it’s wrong.

You can , however, blame them for refusing to return the shit they stole.

It’s a conundrum. If we start returning things that were stolen in the past, well that includes a lot of stuff.

If you are on the losing side you might sometimes have to return things (see looted nazi stuff), but if you are on the winning side you probably won’t (see pretty much all of the Americas).

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#82

Post by gadders »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #80

What is the Warwickshire Lieutenancy? My understanding is it's some sort of royally appointed representative at the county level, but I'm not sure if it's a ceremonial role?

Mostly ceremonial/charitable but with some formal duties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord-lieutenant#Duties

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#83

Post by gizajob »

rob74 wrote: post #76
arrowsmith wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes me wonder what either priceless lost artefacts are hiding in plain sight somewhere.

One is definitely the Salvator Mundi painting which (at least according to most experts) is a lost Leonardo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvator_Mundi_(Leonardo)#Hist... - it was considered a copy of the lost original for most of its existence because at some point it had been very badly "restored".

Almost certainly not a leonardo and passed off as one to the tune of $500million which is why it’s disappeared ever since.

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#84

Post by gizajob »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #55
wordofx wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s such a dumb comment. Back when the British was taking items back to the UK. There were no rules or systems in place for this stuff. You could buy it, trade it, steal it. It didn’t matter. And the UK isn’t the only country to ever do this. Laws were created to resolve/fix/prevent things happening. You can’t blame people for shit that happened before someone decided it’s wrong.

You can , however, blame them for refusing to return the shit they stole.

It’s not stolen, it’s just been moved for the very long term.

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#86

Post by lupusreal »

qingcharles wrote: post #48
arrowsmith wrote: post #17

Reminds me of the "lost" painting that was rediscovered via the movie Stuart Little : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Little_(film)#Lost_pain...

That's wild. Also wild that the set dresser paid $500 from the film's budget for a random piece of non-key set dressing like this.

The article says that after the movie was made, the painting was owned by a set designer. I wonder if it was the same person who bought it for Sony. Seems kind of dodgy.

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#87

Post by lupusreal »

Ekaros wrote: post #73
WD-42 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The British never really shed their love for royalty. Just one of the things us yanks like to “take the piss” from then on. Seems silly to us.

They are celebrities in sense, with at least publicly higher standards("presentable")...

Yeah but only weirdos have pictures of celebrities hung up in their house.

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#88

Post by sofixa »

Flop7331 wrote: post #40
twodave wrote: post #28

Huh. I share a surname with the original owner (Sheldon) and once researched Henry XIII for a people fair. I think that means I’m the rightful owner…

You'd have to travel into the future to research Henry XIII

To be fair, they didn't specify Henry XIII of what. There are plenty of them - if nothing else a bunch from the House of Reuss where all male kids are called Henry (Heinrich) Number (one branch just keeps incrementing the number to 100, and then rolls over to 1; the other one rolls over every century).

There's even a living one who was in the news not all that long ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_XIII_Prinz_Reuss

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#89

Post by sofixa »

xeromal wrote: post #56
qingcharles wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's patriotic to have a picture of your royals in your home. You'd find pictures of The Royal Family in British homes, not so much now, but certainly photos of say Diana were fairly common in the 80s.

That makes sense. I don't think it's really popular here in the United States to have a president on your wall but I have seen pictures of them in restaurants especially if they frequented the establishment. It makes me curious about this specific example if the painter copied another painting of the king or he managed to somehow get time with the king in order to know what he looks like for the commission.

> I don't think it's really popular here in the United States to have a president on your wall

In exchange there are flags and political posters and signs on lawns, and religious representations in some religious households.

Re: Missing Henry VIII portrait found after random X post

#90

Post by rolisz »

rowanG077 wrote: post #72
LudwigNagasena wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most mind-blowing thing is just how much those skills rely on tacit knowledge and subconscious pattern recognition. There is really a lesson to be learned here in our age when data-based everything is en vogue. Our decision-making shouldn’t be data-driven, it should be data-informed.

I disagree. Hasn't it been shown that AI outperform radiologists on recognizing diseases from images?

Not really. On very narrow datasets, from very specific machines. When they tried to generalize (the way a radiologist does) across multiple hospitals and multiple machines from different manufacturers, results are not that good.
Post reply on HN