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

Owls in Towels

owlsintowels.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: Owls in Towels

#91

Post by GreenWatermelon »

ttoinou wrote: post #9

Do you think this kind of internet nuggets will still exist in our soon to be post-AI world ? We won't be able to know who sent a real vs. a fake picture

I guess we will have to rely on extra-net signals: Meta clues from the real world.

For example, the website creator doesn't seem to be looking for profit, nor did they add much oin terms of personal info that would point to him looking for internet clout.

The FAQ page comes across as genuine and, as another commenter put it, whimsical.

It's also all self hosted, and on a unique domain, while mass-content-farmera prefer prefer the zombified audiences of Tiktok and Facebook.

All those signals combine into a high probability of everything on the site being genuine.

Re: Owls in Towels

#92

Post by indoorcat »

hungmung wrote: post #17

I've had to do this several times, it's really the best way to handle birds and bats that get into your home -- just toss the towel on top of it and pick it up. Another trick if a bird flies into your window and stuns itself, you can pick it up with a towel and place it in a (closed) cardboard box outside in the shade so they can recover without a ton of sensory input/stressors, you just have to make sure predators d…

As a PSA: if you’re in North America, do not handle bats. They are the primary rabies vector and due to their tiny sharp teeth, it is possible to be bitten unknowingly. Rabies is (almost) 100% fatal once you have symptoms. Leave it to the professionals who are vaccinated and know how to handle them safely. In the US, local animal control can usually help.

Re: Owls in Towels

#93

Post by idamantium »

rajnathani wrote: post #60
abstractbill wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly my first reaction to seeing these photos was to wonder if they were AI-generated (I'm not suggesting they are, I just have that response quite often now).

Exact same, my first reaction to the photos were to think they are AI-generated (which amazingly, they aren't).

I actually didn't think that at all, maybe because the opening text was so straight forward, earnest, and pragmatic?

Re: Owls in Towels

#94

Post by reaperducer »

stefanka wrote: post #79

One mentioned glue traps. What’s that and why is it used? Sounds like a horrible way to catch birds.

One mentioned glue traps. What’s that and why is it used?

Glue traps are used to catch mice and rats. The owl sees its prey struggling in the trap, and tries to eat it.

Many birds of prey die due to eating poisoned rats and mice. Most famously, Flaco, who escaped from the Central Park zoo and entertained New Yorkers for months before eating a poisoned rat.

Re: Owls in Towels

#95

Post by fuzzfactor »

specproc wrote: post #70
gsck wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theres a phrase in the UK that is "Cheap and cheerful" which I think is perfectly apt for this

I think "cheap" sounds worse in American.

I would say "low-cost, high-impact" when that makes more sense.

In this case it's more like low-cost high-delight which does sound a bit better than "cheap thrills" ;)

The owls do seem to convey a sense of communal grumpiness, expressed individually :)

Not unlike HN at tines . . .

Re: Owls in Towels

#96

Post by fuzzfactor »

mortenjorck wrote: post #88

This is the kind of project that always used to be its own website, but these days largely exists only on a social media platform where it's stuffed between other content and the usual barrage of ads. Which is a roundabout way of saying: I love that this is a website.

Especially when you consider that places like Facebook or Linkedin are not even a website any more, once their web address takes you nowhere and they are useless without "signing in".

Re: Owls in Towels

#97

Post by fuzzfactor »

idamantium wrote: post #93
rajnathani wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exact same, my first reaction to the photos were to think they are AI-generated (which amazingly, they aren't).

I actually didn't think that at all, maybe because the opening text was so straight forward, earnest, and pragmatic?

Appearances can be deceiving :\

That in itself is something that AI can leverage, maybe not better-than-average, but way more often, so people have to be on their toes a lot more too. Whether it's images or not.

Interestingly, with images like this they are highly curated for cuteness, clarity, and composition. If nothing else because there are so many photos taken of each owl during the rescue process, across a large number of photo opportunities. So there is often quite a huge variety of material from which to choose one outstanding example for each owl.

This would then make an optimized training set if you wanted to generate realistic facsimiles digitally later on.

When you do the math though, "who" needs a digital facsimile when the vast majority of actual real-world material is far in excess and not being used at all?

Re: Owls in Towels

#99

Post by fuzzfactor »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #90
jxf wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a beautiful demonstration of how technology can be simple and powerful for amplifying a message at the same time -- no matter the silliness or seriousness of the message. Very "Old Web" vibes. Anyone who's worked on random enterprise CRUD REST apps earlier in their career (myself included) knows the pain of wishing that you were doing something a little more helpful or positive for humanity.

Dovetails nicely with the Superb Owl enthusiasts. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22superb+owl%22&ia=images&iax=ima...

Yup, all it takes is a single typo seen by somebody who is not very familiar with American football, and wants to find out more about the teams playing in that year's Superb owl . . .

Re: Owls in Towels

#100

Post by pfdietz »

thyristan wrote: post #40
f4c39012 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One brand of UK dish soap, Fairy Liquid, bears the label "H412 - Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects"

https://www.newhall.co.uk/media/7440_msds.pdf The H412 comes from sodium laureth sulfate (SLES) which is contained (in large amounts, like 20 to 70% by weight) in practically every kind of liquid soapy detergent, shampoo, liquid hand soap and what not. The only reason you know of that one product is that they seem to sell to professionals as well, which is why they need a material safety data sheet. Your shampoo does…

ACS's Chemical of the Week for October 24, 2017.

https://www.acs.org/molecule-of-the-week/archive/s/sodium-la...

Post reply on HN