Slashdot Mirror
Why You Should Never Lose Your Digital Media
kkrista writes "What would you do if you found someone's digital media card from their camera in your taxi? One such individual has decided to provide the world with 227 days of entertainment. I Found Some Of Your Life will post a photo a day and accompanying fictional narrative for the next 227 days using the photos found on a digital media card left in a cab. Is it pure genius or pure evil? Who cares? Just be thankful they're not your photos."
It's truly one of the great blogs of all time, IMO. Ya just gotta read it from the beginning to savor it fully. Soon however, perhaps even tonight via this very thread, the gig, as they say, will be up.
One of "Jordan's" Slashdot-reading frat brothers (probably the goofy EE major who got in on a legacy bid) will spill the beans. I'd love to be a fly on the paddle-festooned wall for that moment.
What will happen next? The blogger has been careful to conceal his or her identity. What are the legal issues? Can the blog continue? Does the blogger face any liabilities?
If "Jordan" and his chums play it one way, they could be minor celebrities for a while--perhaps concealing their knowledge of the blog's existence to let the thing reach critical mass. Jordan could be the next Mahir! "I am Jordan! I high five you!"
On the other hand, they can probably bring terrible, expensive legal might to bear. What will blogspot do? What will become of America's new best-loved blog?
This little dramady is just beginning! heh
"...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
Found photo sites are the best.
http://www.spillway.com/ is still the king of "found photos on the Internet."
At first I thought they looked like frat boys, and sorority girls, then I saw the white shirt dude's tag:
google: Kappa Delta
[blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
Sounds very much like the Camera in the woods which turned out to be a hOaX with most of the pictures photoshopped with aliens and stuff
fifteen jugglers, five believers
There were about thirty-some shots that were all stereotypical 'poor southern family'. Very odd, and a little sad, until you realized that they were genuinely smiling in every picture.
Interesting stories played out in my head about this family until I got my boring pics back.
I was in Baton Rouge, LA. My car was having some problems with the AC and I stopped in at a Ford Dealer (Autobahn Ford) to get my R-12 recharged. Someone there took my Canon Powershot S30 with my IBM CompactFlash 384MB drive. Fucking redneck assholes. I should have beat the shit out of the inbred fucks working there, but that's a different story for a different day.
Regardless of how pissed I am at losing a $400 camera to a couple of asshats, I had some photos of my then girlfriend in various comprimising positions. To keep this brief, if I saw photos of her on the internet, bad things would happen to all involved. I wouldn't be surprised that if some of the images on that card are more personal, and if the owners get a glance, someone is gonna get hurt bad.
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
I for one think this whole thing is bullshit. I believe he actually does own the memory card and pretending to have nicked it. What kind of person has the time to play with someone elses memory card? If I found it, I'd just put all of them up at once in a web gallery for all to see. Why the silliness?
The point is that what this person is doing is wrong. Taking another's property (no matter where you found it) is simply illegal. And using it in any way that the person would not approve of is definitely wrong (and now you would be telling me that the person who posted this stuff would not mind his pics being posted?).
It's not being greedy - for having done something like this, I'd like to see the other person suffer. The idea of sending a man to prison is not to make others feel happy - it's to make HIM feel bad and pay for his crime. Whether or not it works is a different issue, the idea is that you are punished for your actions.
Duh, I can't help it if you have an idea that taking a person to court is merely for my monetary benefit. That's YOUR flawed thinking, nowhere in my post did I suggest so. I merely said I'd sue this person for his wrongful act.
Is there anything in wanting to take a person to court because s/he posted my pics? And ofcourse, the brilliant Slashdot mods will moderate it down because nobody ever stops to think for a moment what the post really meant.
Sheesh.
Depends on jurisdiction. For instance, there was an example from 1993 in Mass where a couple found a $10,000 lottery ticket in a parking lot. Mass had a law that obligated people who find property worth over $3 to turn it in to the local police. (If not claimed in a year, the finder can claim it.)
It was only a decision by the local DA that the case wasn't worth pursuing that kept it out of the courts.
The copyright on the pictures is owned by whoever took them. I'd imagine whoever posted them might owe the owner of the memory stick a few bucks. Hopefully that guy has a sense of humor.
paintball
This woman "Dianne" in the blog is found here from the Vanderbilt Kappa Delta site. Here name is...well, you can figure it out.
Check out Fusker. Especially the photos from Photobucket and Live Journal. Those are worth checking out.
"so i stole $5 from the person who dropped the $5 bill in the parking lot. no one was to be seen, it was the middle of the night. i hardly think you're right here"
Depends on where you are. For instance, in 1993 a Mass DA had to decide whether to apply a statute requiring people who find property over $3 to turn it in to the police station in the case of a family that found a $10,000 lottery ticket. (The actual owner later looked for it in the same location.) Ultimately, the family was not charged. Though it's an interesting question to ponder if the father had not been the local fire chief and a very respected member of the town if the outcome would have been different.
So unless you've looked at NY law specifically, don't think you know what it says.
(I personally have not looked either, so I remain neutral. I apologize if you have.)
Agreed. The blog writer even mentions he wants the owner to get his pictures back at the top of every single page in that header poem with the line:
"Maybe you will come here and reclaim this piece of your life."
Reminds me of "The Trachtenburg Family Slideshow Players". From their web site:
It's a little weirder than it sounds.
Are you kidding me? If I left a roll of film around (cuz I don't have digital), somebody developed it, & turned it into a blog with a funny story attached to it, i'd think it were freaking hilarious! I'd want the pictures back, of course, but as long as they weren't crude about it, I could really care less.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Next time a celebrity is in town, take a photo and upload it here.
Its a memory card, its not like there is an address and phone number on it.
Surely I'm not the only one to put my name and phone number on my various memory cards, just in case something like this happens? Not that it'll guarantee I'll ever see them again if I lose them, but at least whoever finds them would have the chance to ring me up to have a laugh or try and blackmail me or whatever...
you can steal a car, or a book, or a bike... or a camera, to stay on topic
but the endless and effortless copying of electronic bits is not "stealing" in that you deprive someone of something that is there property, something solid, physical, made of atoms
now i'm not condoning kazaa, nor marching down the "information wants to be free, man" technoanarchist's tired rant
but what i am saying is that what you are talking about is not stealing at all, and it is most definitely NOT the same as the physical world
what it is is something entirely new and different, and atoms are not bits, and they are subject to different rules and interpretations
what are those rules?
i don't know, but neither should you pretend to know either
because all those people who say "it's very simple" are very wrong
it's not a simple problem, really, it's not, and our whole cultural and legal standards about online behavior with bits instead of atoms is something we're all just beginning to come to terms with, and it is very complex, and very new
anyone who says it is very simple, or says it is just like the physical world, just doesn't get it, at all, in a very fundamental way, and they are not helping the situation in the least with their stubborn brittle attitude that refuses to understand when something is very different and alien to traditional cultural and legal interpretations
now i am not saying what this guy who found the camera did does not have negative real world traditional legal and cultural implications, and he also has dubious online cyberbehavior problems as well
and music pirates and script kiddies are not helping the situation
but also this: your simplistic kneejerk unthinking attitude about online behavior isn't helping either, not in the least
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It's not being greedy - for having done something like this, I'd like to see the other person suffer. The idea of sending a man to prison is not to make others feel happy - it's to make HIM feel bad and pay for his crime. Whether or not it works is a different issue, the idea is that you are punished for your actions.
Are you sure about that? I always thought the idea of punishments was to deter actual and potential offenders?
You'd like to see the other person suffer? That's rather small of you. Personally, I'd like to think that the intent of the law is to reduce suffering...
how many taxi drivers do you know that are smart enough to create a blog, making the images smaller for display, and witty enough to go and make up a story on it?
Ummmm, how many taxi drivers do you know at all? I have a good friend who's a Taxi driver and he's very intelligent; just not motivated enough to do something else for a living. Among his colleagues there are quite a few very intelligent guys, who have various reasons for driving a taxi: Some are students (it's perfect for the flexible hours), at least 2 I've met are even PhD's in purely academic fields (i.e. no big job opportunities); one was like a PhD in Music Theory or something and plays in a Folk Music group, which isn't lucrative enough to make a living, but he loves it. Okay, this is in Germany, but I think this applies elsewhere too.
-chris
San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
Her tag says Lindsey. And the treasurer of Kappa-Delta is named Lindsey Herrel http://www.vanderbilt.edu/KappaDelta/. Apparently she is the organiser of the local dance maraton: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/dance_marathon/. Some slashdotters should go there and check it out for us.
Yes, I agree with that. Here in Scotland I know a guy with a PhD in theoretical physics who drives a cab simply because in this country there are not many opportunities for theoretical physicists.
There was also a big story in the news here recently about a geneticist who gave up his amazingly crappy paid research job to become a gas fitter, for double or treble the money. it is the same principle, I would imagine.
How does this differ from Found Magazine, a magazine which consists entirely of snippets of people's lives found lying around discarded or lost?
While the actions might be (since apparently the blogger actually does own the card) illegal or immoral, the end result was an interesting idea for something that is, essentially, a piece of art, and seeing the originator prosecuted would be a sad day.
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
"The idea of sending a man to prison is not to make others feel happy - it's to make HIM feel bad and pay for his crime."
Replied:
"You'd like to see the other person suffer? That's rather small of you. Personally, I'd like to think that the intent of the law is to reduce suffering..."
Alternative:
The purpose of punishment is the hope that it will cause the individual to repent. Once they realise they have done wrong, they can take steps to make sure they don't do it again. If they never accept their wrong-doing, they cannot get better.
Thanks for posting the direct links, didn't realize until after I posted that the blog admin had removed the comment. Now that's rather unsporting. (the rest of the convsersation is still interesting. Also, there's a mention of "Diane's" real name, Lindsey, in the comments still)
Actually, I know some of the guys in the pictures. They're frat boys from Vanderbilt, my school. I am privileged enough to have gotten drunk on their beer freshman year.
In any case, I happen to know that they are nowhere near smart enough or geeky enough to create a blog out of their pictures, let alone do so as a hoax.
barzelay.net
What if I go out and take pictures of somebody using MY camera and posting them all over the web. That isn't illegal, is is? It should have the same consequences for the "victim". Ofcourse it makes a big difference if the photos are taken in embarrasing situations, but the photos in the blog seemed to be quite innocent.
I bought a USB keydrive at a computer show that still had stuff on it. The previous owner was apparantly a geologist working for various petroleum companies. He had some powerpoint slides in there that had his email address, so I was able to get in touch with him and send him a CDR with his files on it (he had already bought a replacement device). He didn't say how he lost/misplaced the drive -- might have actually been a cab or airport shuttle.
If the drive had contained photos, would I have posted them on the Internet? No, because they wouldn't have belonged to me. Would I have looked at them? Yes, I'm as curious as the next guy.
Chip H.
Um, how does the creator know that the original owner didn't LEAVE the pictures in a taxi to be discovered? Found art?
Bonehead,
The camera was purchased.
The media wasn't lost; it was included in the purchase of that camera.
The images weren't lost; they were included on the media.
Your argument is akin to "I bought this MS-Win2K CD from Comp-USA, and it had MS-Win2K on it!"
Oh, the DATA on that CD isn't included with the purchase of that media. REGARDLESS that the SELLER should have a REASONABLE EXPECTATION that there was data on them, you can't prove he did, and YOU should GO to JAIL."
Nonsense. If something is purchased "as-is", the door swings both ways.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
if you look, he didn't post one picture per day to cover the 35 pictures per day already up... There were a bunch of stuff in the beginning of august flirting with doing just a top ten, with a few pictures unnumbered... and it jumps from sept 9 to august 30.
So maybe the person got the idea to make it an april fools day joke after already starting the blog?
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I go to school there (Vanderbilt). The dance marathon is actually a legitimate charity event that a fairly good number of people actually go to. I showed these pictures to one of my roommates and he actually knows some of the guys. I wonder if I added a link of this site in my instant messaging profile if the owner would soon find out about it due to a small number of degrees of separation... hmm.... Or if it was a farce, he'd get even more publicity from students here.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. But still, lawyers can inflate actual damages, especially with respect to the rights of privacy and publicity.
Just one more plug for the Dance Marathon - - it is a great program that does a lot to help sick kids in need.
"Creativity is allowing ones self to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep" - Scott Adams