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

No Instagram, no privacy

blog.wouterjanleys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 126 posts

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#91

Post by immibis »

barbazoo wrote: post #32
igor47 wrote: post #2

i've thought the same thing about email. i run my own email server, so i'm one of a very few number of people whose email is opaque to gmail. on the other hand -- almost everyone i exchange email with uses gmail, so actually gmail has almost all my email anyway.

Interesting. I never thought about adjusting my message based on the email provider they use. Would be hard to do, someone could be using their own domain but the email goes through Gmail.

In many cases you could check their MX or SPF records. See what advice Google gives to use Gmail on your domain; then see if the domain followed that advice.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#93

Post by chaoskitty »

SoftTalker wrote: post #28
AndriyKunitsyn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you have any problems with Gmail not trusting your server and moving your letters to spam?

Don't immediately start hosting your own email on a brand new domain especially if you're using a free or very low-cost VPS provider. Pay a bit more for a better reputation provider. Use a domain you've owned for a while. Set up all SPF, DKIM, and DMARC properly. Or just pay fastmail to do it for you.

You're conflating a few different issues: the newness of a domain, and the quality and cost of of your VPS.

Some email providers don't like brand new domains, yes, but if a domain is brand new, nobody is going to immediately start using it for mission critical things. That's just common sense, although now I want to buy a domain to see how much of an issue this really is.

The cost and quality of a VPS means very little because if a VPS is on a network with a poor reputation, one can easily smarthost through a mail provider that has a good reputation.

Likewise, people can run servers at home, or they can colocate, or whatever, and don't have to run a VPS at all, although I think you're just generalizing and aren't suggesting that people can't use other servers.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#94

Post by throwanem »

paxys wrote: post #4

"I went on a weekend trip and didn't invite friend A, so I hope friend B keeps it a secret and doesn't tell anyone I was there" is the kind of social dynamic that people grow out of in high school. If you are having trouble with it as an adult then it isn't really Instagram's fault. People talk to each other and share stuff, and sometimes they talk about you, both online and offline. Just live your life without being…

> If you are having trouble with [social dynamics] as an adult then it isn't really Instagram's fault.

Are you sure?

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#95

Post by reverendsteveii »

accrual wrote: post #78
procaryote wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You allowed to have boundaries even if there's a few assholes who won't respect them

In this example RMS made a request to the audience. A boundary would be something like "if you post photos of me to Facebook, you won't be invited to my conferences" or "if you do X, I won't interact with you". Might be difficult to enforce, but that's on the person making the boundary.

That's the defining feature of a boundary: you don't actually tell people what to do. You just tell them what you'll do. "Don't talk to me like that" is an ask, "Talk to me like that again and I'll leave" is a boundary.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#96

Post by hoherd »

noman-land wrote: post #85
zombitack wrote: post #44

After being friends with public people, I got in the habit of asking people in pictures before I post, regardless of if they're on Instagram or not. And I NEVER post kid pictures. I find these rules should be obvious to most people. I'll even ask my wife first, who is always just about to post the same set of pictures I am. It's the decent thing to do.

How often do you get a no?

I take personal pride in how many of my friends have online avatars that are candid portraits that I took of them while we were out doing whatever, and I have had numerous people contact me and ask me to remove all of their photos. In the past sometimes it was "replace my name in the tags with a pseudonym" but now it's "remove them all." This all happened before AI took over, so you can imagine how relieved many of those people are in the age of deepfakes. Candid portraits are my favorite kind of photo to take, but sadly in the modern age, I've chosen to take down almost all of my portraits. I still have a self-hosted photo sharing software set up that I personally use to look through my collection and can share past memories with people, including lots of portraits I would have previously posted online, but I think most people and I have our guard up against AI crawlers. AI crawlers have made the web much more hostile than it was in the past.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#97

Post by nalekberov »

I'm visiting Instagram lately only to see funny reels sent from my friends. My Instagram timeline is consisting of 90% influencers and life coaches, who is going to tell me my life sucks because I don't do what they have to tell me to do and 10% my friends.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#98

Post by ryandrake »

rootnod3 wrote: post #50
alwa wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s value in grace. For all sorts of reasons you might be right to do things that make other people feel bad. That’s no reason to rub their nose in it. What’s the virtue in offending people when you could instead be kind? I know one woman who is having a baby shower, and I know another woman who recently dealt with the loss of her child. It’s not “secrecy” to celebrate the baby shower and avoid bringing it up wit…

The people being offended could just act like an adult. If you want to go out with friend A but don't want friend B to see it for whatever reason (maybe B has a feud with A), then that is a thing between B and A, but not you. I think the whole point of the OP comment is to just go with it. If you don't flauntingly advertise it, it is not your fault. But in a very social media centric world, even if you are just a par…

As someone who doesn't use any social media, this whole thread sound exhausting to have to worry about. "I shouldn't post X because Y might be offended at Z..." Holy crap, I feel vindicated for my decision to entirely stay off of this drama machine.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#99

Post by Funes- »

This bothered me a lot in the past. I want to be in full control of any information that is on the Internet concerning myself. Some of the people I know will add an appeasing comment before taking a picture: "don't worry, I won't upload it anywhere!", but most people will just post it willy-nilly all the same.

By the way, during last Monday's blackout in Spain, I had a sense of this kind of burden being lifted from the atmosphere... the idea of nobody having the ability to record and publish anything anymore (for the duration of the blackout, at least), was quite interesting... relieving, even.

Re: No Instagram, no privacy

#100

Post by alistairSH »

Approaching zero of my friends are on Meta any more. Most have inactive accounts; a few have canceled outright. Those that are “active” are mostly limited to wishing each other happy birthday.

Afaic, Meta pretty much killed their platforms by pumping rage-bait clicks instead of social content.

Post reply on HN