"Apple severed ties" repeats.
“Sign in to confirm you’re not a bot.”
(iPhone Safari)
The Ea-Nasir tablet is in a museum, but at least I can see pictures of it without giving my personal information to a multi-trillion dollar corporation.
In a mere months it was gutted on every side and Windows tablets (rspecially 8" favour) gone the way of DoDo
> These videos come from YouTube. They were uploaded in the last week and have titles like DSC 1234 and IMG 4321. They have almost zero previous views. They are unnamed, unedited, and unseen (by anyone but you).
At one point you might be at a school recital in Malaysia, and the next minute you are at a birthday in Ecuador. It's amazing!
I might be wrong in your specific case, but generally YouTube doesn't just remove videos with copyrighted audio. Often copyright holders instead make it so that the video with their songs will have ads and they'll receive all the ad revenue.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7002106?hl=en
"Depending on the copyright owner's Content ID settings, Content ID claims can:
- Block content from being viewed.
- Monetize content by running ads on it and sometimes sharing revenue with the uploader.
- Track the viewership statistics on the content.
Any of these actions can be geography-specific. For example, a video can be monetized in one country/region and blocked or tracked in a different country/region."
As Microsoft moved more of those apps out of the inbox image and to the store, the functionality slowly stopped working.
The sunset of windows phone ended the rest of those features.
A couple hours after posting this on my site, I found this incredible vid of a woman telling her partner she’s pregnant. Incredibly heartfelt, and only 16 views https://youtu.be/refKFdcojlE?si=l-PssLVYmmOPjjjA
It was posted over 10 years ago. I wonder if the family even knows that this video still exists.
Side note, I'll also recommend people to look up "X city in 1990s / 2000s" on YouTube. San Francisco, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Toronto, London and etc. have cool slice of life content from people who were very into camcorders.
It's not rose tinted glasses, it's just a poor comparison.
The absolute vast majority of these videos have double digit if not any views. You're seeking them out, using a little quirk of naming and the poster's DGAFism. There is no pretense of promotion to a large audience or virality. Anything spoonfed you on a Tiktok or Instagram feed could not be more different. The default Youtube experience is the same as mass Tiktok. Moreover you can find plenty of similar material like this on Instagram and Tiktok if you go looking for it, that is after all what most people are using it for, bumming around with their friends. The algorithm isn't going to spoonfeed this to you, and obviously Youtube never did either.
The same as if you just used a website or extension to play random youtube videos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DCFCQ9GYUY
By coincidence this is one of my favourite songs by one of my favourite bands.
noticed that the YouTube videos continue playing without interruption even when I switch to another tab or minimize chrome altogether and switch to another app.
how can we harness this power to play our favorite audio tracks in background (without any ads to boot ... shhh don't tell Google)
I also notice that the website triggers a browser warning when loading that it is not secure.
Edit: I found the set list for that show:
https://www.setlist.fm/setlist/pulp/2011/hyde-park-london-en...
I feel like that would result in a lot more "hey guys don't forget to like and subscribe" type of videos.
You know it's wrong but you won't look elsewhere...
It's a matter of degree. Early YouTube was much closer to what the parent poster describes than the YouTube of today.
When I first discovered YouTube and uploaded videos, the thought of making money (let alone making a living) was nowhere in my mind.
It's why I'm sad that we no longer have one obvious default for microblogging. It was such a rich source of thoughts. That's all gone now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_rule_for_Camera_File_sy...
TFA, "Apple uses the ‘IMG_XXXX’ naming convention for all images and videos captured on iOS devices, where XXXX is a unique sequence number." isn't very accurate, as the numbers are not unique. They're just sequential. if you take 1001 images, the file system will actually create a new folder and roll the digits back to 0000 to avoid overwriting
(By the way, presumably there are still about 9 months to go in that pregnancy before the child is born.)
It is not the responsibility of others to guess your intentions.
That's the issue. These people likely didn't affirmatively do that.
I suppose the woman filming the video could have taken much longer to realize (unlikely, but possible), or chose to wait to tell the father until several months later (also unlikely, but possible), but either way, the kid is turning 10 now-ish, not 11.
It's also possible that this video was posted well after it was taken, in which case we can't say much about the age of the kid, except that it likely happened before this "Share to YouTube" functionality was removed from iOS.
Whether this was legal is... a gray area, it was a somewhat legitimate company that won some kind of Canadian startup contest on TV, but the music industry was, very predictably, furious at their business model.
Eventually, Apple got scared enough of being sued along with them that they caved in and removed the app, but that took far longer than I thought it would.
There's a good article at https://torrentfreak.com/apple-removes-parasitic-streaming-a...
What I'm gathering from the comments here is that these videos excite faculties of man that are less carnal than the other examples.
Be that as it may.
And Angry Birds.
Woah, can you expand on that? Did you get IP banned from YouTube?
For a few months, it was possible to feel the incredible simultaneity and richness of human lives. Someone biking, another person cooking. Day in one place, night in another place.
It was ahead of its time. And too expensive for Twitter to keep running for too long. But it was a precursor to today's Snapschat's map view and Instagram live streams.
I miss the early days of the internet (and especially YouTube) so fucking much. I'm 28 now, and I've been online since 2009. I think 2009-2014 was the GOLDEN AGE of the internet for me, especially on YouTube.
But then again, I kinda suspect there's some deeper truth going on where your mentioned golden age might be one of the last though?
But sometimes I think the only reason (or the main reason) is that I was a teenager. It isn't about internet, it is about the user and how they saw the worldwide at that time...
By any chance is this or similar on github :)
Also, I remember how many different frameworks and "rich internet application" technologies existed back then (Adobe Flash, Microsoft Silverlight, Apple QuickTime, etc.). In many ways, the internet was a much more diverse and a much more 'unpredictable' place back then.
What a bizarre and obviously false claim to make for no reason in the middle of the article
For what it's worth, Apple are just conforming to the JEITA/CIPA DCF standard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_rule_for_Camera_File_sy...
“DCF file names” specification sez… http://www.kronometric.org/phot/std/DC-009-2010_E.pdf#page=2...
“File names conforming to the following rules are called DCF file names.
• The file name is 8 characters (not including the file extension).
• The first four characters consist only of the upper-case alphanumeric characters shown in Table 1
• These are referred to as the DCF file name Free characters. They shall not contain two-byte characters or special codes.
• The four characters that follow are a number between "0001" and "9999". "0000" shall not be used. These four digits are referred to as File number.
• Files with the same file number stored in the same DCF directory are considered to be object component files as defined in 4.3.2.”
I remember the first banner ad!
Wikipedia didn't exist. It was possible to run out of websites to visit. People were, in general, super friendly, aside from the trolls on AIM trying to crash other people's clients. (IRC was a separate place though, I mostly spent time on websites.)
Forums had horrible UIs, the latency was awful. Compared to dial up BBSs that came before the user experience was much worse.
Everything was authentic. People just doing stuff, posting about what they loved. Uploading art they made and photos they took. The barrier to entry was high (you needed to own a scanner and be able to figure out how to set it up!), but not so high that determined non-technical users couldn't muddle through and still make great things.
I also wrote about my experiences and why I consider this time the golden age in a blog post here: <https://susam.net/web-golden.html>.
Same.
> Seeing little snapshots like these, most of them seemingly just for memory's sake, makes me feel a little more human.
For me these videos only highlight the previously mentioned state of affairs.
“THE CULT- SHE SELLS SANCTUARY- LIVE DETROIT 2010”
Pretty great.
And it's not like this particular content was once popular in the "good old days", the view counts are literally 0 in some cases.
The original eternal September[1] predates my entry to the internet by a couple of years, but the cycle repeats eternally.
I remember looking through the code awhile ago, it's nice and simple!
Uses socket.io w node.js + express, a crawler script searches YT periodically to keep the videos fresh. The server iterates randomly through the video list, telling all clients through socket.io which video is next, and when to switch.
My late wife is in it. She died recently. I didn't know that video was still up there until I read your post. And now my heart breaks.
Good job on putting this #1 HN.
Ever get a good response back?
I have been surprised a time or two ending up in a conversation with someone who took the time same as I did. Just because we could.
DSC, IMG, etc etc.
Its like a ghost in the machine prompt.
But still, plenty of blog posts from early 2000s to comment on in 2007, especially on the likes of LiveJournal or Blogger.
> In fact, many were likely uploaded by accident or with a misunderstanding that complete strangers could see it.
Throughout the article, there are reasons why one would think that (like most having zero views, no descriptions, no engagement etc).
It's the usual, the fact that we can does not mean that we should.
https://youtu.be/pLJ85XExZtQ?si=75ZykQeUjgItcpDM
Not sure what triggered it, but I began odd searches a while ago and want to echo many of the "feels like the good old days" type comments.
Video made without any real production intent is compelling. It is pure, raw, just human and many of us hunger for that because the big media players dominate hard for fear of losing to their peers it seems.
And that behavior is expensive to us.
I first thought of this when seeing someone take a picture of their computer screen. There is just so much friction in moving data.
I should be able to take anything off any screen and move the source material to any other screen on any device or cloud with a simple 1-click process. Including the devices of a friend or family member.
Microsoft forced OEM's to replace the right ctrl key with a copilot key. really it should have been an 'interoperability' key.
OTOH, people featured in these videos are not going to hold a press conference when they start a new job (eg movie filming, sport team changes, winning elections), or even about a terminal illness they might be facing, where all of those are quite common with celebrities.
Videos are so big and cloud storage for it pretty expensive. since nothing I film is nuclear launch codes, I just upload it all to youtube as a way to store it for free.
Also gives me a handy sharing link for sending to friends too.
At any time of the day you could go to the website and watch normal people around the globe doing random stuff. And chat with them!There weren't any real influencers at the time (at least not on the platform) and monetization wasn't possible, so people's motivations for live streaming stuff was not to make money but rather the joy of sharing a moment or just experiencing new cool technology. It got a bit less joyful when the Arabic Spring started and the platform got used by many in very dire situations but it remained incredibly interesting to follow.
The company still exists, though they stopped offering free-to-use consumer services long ago.
With yt-dlp you can do this:
yt-dlp ytsearch5:IMG_0416
Would be cool to see some statistics on how many videos over the years get removed with each new protection and censorship update. For example the latest medical disinformation campaign not only forces creators to avoid certain words completely, but also flagged and deleted pre-existing videos.
It’s sad and dangerous that any topic could get forbidden and erased not allowed to keep a history. The Internet Archive is unfortunately a target now and efforts are being taken to undermine it partly. It’s already a thing to have records deleted from the archive which should be the most worse thing when your whole concept is to archive.
I strongly suggest IA mirrors around the world in various countries with different legislations so that the censorship of each country is not reflected in the IA mirror of the other.
Hoping that helps. Otherwise, you might try something like https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp.
A feature Nokia with Android One used to have too, but Android itself doesn't have.
IA doesn't delete archives, they merely make them inaccessible. Perhaps that's a distinction without a difference in the near-term, but it means things like copyrighted content will be republished after copyright expires.
I didn't know this feature existed back in the days, and you just cannot ignore the haptic feedback feeling when you watch original, unedited content from random people who were filming not for the sake of publishing to the mass but just for themselves and friends/family to keep these records as memories. This reminds me of the pre-smartphone era where people used to own handheld, personal cameras to capture special moments of their lives as souvenirs.
Also, regarding these "IMG_XXX" videos, one notable pattern is that they all have very low number views, for an obvious reason. The odd one to this pattern is this pregnancy video, which had the number of views jumped from 16 in ten years to to 1,650 in 10 hours. Also, checking the comments' section, they are all new, with the first (oldest) one being posted 9 hours ago.
The 'mainstream media' was never taken seriously by people savvy in the early tech spaces, so the loss of it didn't really hit us as particularly impactful. But that loss made it so that the 'mainstream' no longer had any 'ground truth' they could all fall back on that would be the arbiter of correct and incorrect information, and so truth became whatever felt most right to a person at the time.
This of course has more to do with the people and culture you most identify with, rather than any kind of objective comparison of data, so groups looked more inwards and became ossified in dogma and refused to look at any other perspective in good faith. And here we are.
The issue stems from the fact that images are written with proper EXIF time and timezone metadata while videos from the same camera might only store a timestamp field. Whether that's local time, UTC, or something else depends on the camera and how you configured it.
Thanks for the article
Way too often have I encountered, or hacked in myself, such "business rules".
"Except for these seven transactions from before [random date/time] all transactions made between 01:00 and 01:15, with a round amount, are recurring payments to X. Can we not just use that instead of this data-migration that you've budgetted?" (not literal request, but close enough).
The danger -off course- lies in that this over time becomes actual business logic and that meaning is assigned to (meta)data that was never intended to carry such meaning.
The solution -I've found- starts with what DDD calls "ubiquitous language", where everyone (within a domain!) assigns the same meaning to the same things¹. And model the software around that, never the other way.
¹ So maybe there's a 150 year old rule that states that recurring transactions are those that happen between ...etc. etc. That this is actually a settled and used meaning within the domain experts/users/stakeholders. In that case - IMO - it's far better to lean into it rather than assign some is_recurring_for_x boolean or such that has no meaning in the domain.
It very much is not. No third-party clients; can’t see threads without an account; owner inserting himself and his ideology at the centre; fewer and less diverse participating people; diminished trust in the platform; more spam; different verification rules… Even the character limit is different.
Having followers is the best way to get followers, which creates a fame snowball.
The result is that a few uploads get a bunch of attention, and most uploads get very little attention. The typical user feels lonely, isolated, neglected. Jealously means the attention-rich users, the ones with lots of followers, become targets for bullies -- and that leaves them miserable too. No one is happy.
Platforms with a more equal distribution of attention, such as IRC, didn't have these problems.
Virality was a mistake.
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1653608284606312448
"This is 2015 Periscope code. Yeah, seems like we just need to improve it a bit."
F-Droid and the ability to still run software outside of Google's walled garden is the last remaining reason preventing me from switching to iPhone. I've tried Yattee on iOS and it's okay on Apple TV but seriously doesn't come close to the power of Tubular on Android.
No more.
Of course, people don't use language in a consistent way, and people will use terms thinking they mean e.g. their antonym.
It's probably a common initial reaction to learning of impending parenthood. Life will never be the same. Initially one might only see the looming challenge of the mountain to climb.
I wonder what keywords or tricks I might use to find such blogs in the current days.
○ Apple
- IMG_0001
○ BlackMagic Design
- A001 * C001
○ Canon
- 100-0001
- 101-0001
- 10x-0001
- IMG_0001
- MVI_0001.MOV
○ Casio
- CIMG001
- CIMG0001
○ Fuji
- DSCF0001
○ GoPro
- GX010001.MP4
- GH010001.MP4
○ HP
- HPIM0001
○ Jenoptik
- JD0001
○ JVC
- MOV_0001.mpg
○ Kodak
- P0000001.KDC
- DCP_0001
- 102_0001
○ Konica Minolta
- PICT0001
○ Kyocera
- KIF 0001
○ Nikon
- DSCN0001
- DSC_0001
○ Nokia
- DCM001
- DCM0001
○ Olympus
- Pmdd0001
○ Panasonic
- Pmdd 0001
- P1000001
- P0001
○ Pentax
- IMGP0001
○ Polaroid
- DSCI0001
○ Ricoh
- R0010001
- R0020001
○ Samsung
- P1000001
- SAM 0001
- SH100001
- SV100001
- S7000001
○ Sanyo
- SANY0001
○ Sigma
- IMG0001
○ Sony
- DSC0001
- DSC00001
- DSC_0001
- MAH00001
○ Misc
- Mmddyy-hhmmss
- Yymmdd-hhmm-ss
- yyyymmdd_hhmmss
- VID_yyyymmdd
- mmddyy 3g2
- mmddyy 3gp
- PXL_yyyymmdd_hhmmssms.mp4
What exactly is forbidden, by who? I don't get the use of that word there.
Also, anyone who doesn't know the "before" and "after" search operators is missing out on some excellent nostalgia-trawling similar to what is described here.
"cat before:2007" -> 2005 to 2007, the OG cat videos
"skateboard before:2010" -> yes
"assange interview before:2016" -> then filter for longer videos
"parkour after:2009 before:2015" -> parkour videos from 2009 to 2015I believe the website tried to find videos with least bias possible by doing some clever searches using YouTube API (so not just videos titled IMGXXXX). Maybe it was trying to do partial matches on video ID.
I was on the park the other day and there were these two dudes and one was filming the other walking and talking to the camera. They'd look at the shot and then he'd walk back and do it again and again. Multiple times.
I've also seen people talking regularly to their friends and then suddenly go into "influencer mode" and yell "tell us what you think in the comments! :kissy_face:" then go back to regular talk like nothing happened.
The word "cringey" is overused but it feels like such an inhuman behaviour and so weird to see live. Like the person just suddenly got possessed by some entity other than themselves.
It reminds me of this grandma that played Skyrim for ages but never had any views, but thanks to one of these discover pages, she got a following of tens of thousands.
Others in the comments articulated this better than me: > I understand that these videos were made public, but still this kinda feels like violating people’s privacy. They most likely never intended for us all to watch their personal videos a decade later.
I tried to distill it in a couple words in the blog, bc I didn't want to harp on it. In retrospect, I could've explained it better.
It is really worse than before.
It was discovered recently with Flux that using just IMG_1234.jpg as a prompt gives you a very casual photo like images.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1fxkt3p/co...
https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1fxdm1n/i_...
You'd be thinking wrong. Canon cameras also use the IMG_ format. It's been a while since I've dealt with GoPros, but I'm pretty sure they are IMG_ as well.
While it's nice to hold onto what you know from experience, extrapolating that to end-all-be-all knowledge is just not a good stance. Especially in the light of information from people with wider breadth of information.
This is also interesting when thinking about how to optimize a video platform. You can see how the vast majority of videos could be evicted to cold / slow storage.
It's a Geocities archive containing websites hosted on the platform from the 90s/00s. I really like the creativity and authenticity in the archived sites, it's like looking at a mirror into the past.
The videos are already public on YouTube.
Pretty crude by today's standards, but also a lot more genuine and less risky. At that time there were a lot of people on the internet like me, college kids discovering it for the first time.
Maybe they just wanted to send this video to a friend and didn't have the technical understanding that this will then be visible for everyone searching for it on YouTube.
What annoys me is that when a video is split into multiple files (because of sd card limitations etc), it increases the first number, giving you files that sort really weird. So I film GX010001.mp4, then after 8 minutes it starts a new file GX020001.mp4, GX030001.mp4 etc., and then later that day when I make a new clip, it has GX010002.mp4. This breaks sorting by filename. Can sort by creationdate, but for the chaptered videos they often share the same original datetime as well, making it quite confusing when dealing with loads of gopro videos. (I just published some tooling I've written for creating street view content from gopros, so felt all the quirks lately https://github.com/Matsemann/matsemanns-streetview-tools/ the gopro max starts with GS btw)
1. This isn't really privacy breaching. For someone who taps the "share to youtube" button without knowing what it means, sure, but even that is pretty explicit that you're sharing it. Not sure why the article itself says people didn't know what the button would do before tapping it, so I'd like some further explanation of this point.
2. It's opt in, not opt out. Spending time with most "normal" people has shown me that very few people give a crap about going into settings menus to configure exactly how ther data is used or collected, or otherwise switching to a service that gives them that control. When HN complains about privacy being dead, they are complaining about this apathy end how it gets exploited. This feature does not exploit that apathy.
3. This gives us something that we actually want. When most services invade your privacy, it's usually for things like advertising, targeting content, and data brokering. Things that I know I personally have a lot of issues with, and I feel I'm not alone. This button doesn't do those things, it just gives us interesting videos. So much so that most of the fascination with these videos is that you can feel the absence of those issues.
The vibes hit different
The "legitimate interest" cookies, which are equally comprehensive but are on a different tab, are not rejected by this, and to reject them you have to turn each one of them off by hand, scrolling down a massive list.
If you select "reject all", the dialog instantly closes, I think with the legitimate interest cookies all in use - but I can't check, because I know of no way to get the dialog back up again, which is why I'm saying "I think".
When sites pop this one up, I leave - and notably, The Register, the UK news site, started using it a year or so ago.
Between 2009 and 2012, Apple iPhones and iPod Touches included a feature called “Send to YouTube”
Proceeds to feature two videos from 2015.
Why would a regular user of YouTube ever want to reset their watch history?
Normal men have balls, balls make man attracted to women -> normal men get their attention grabbed by inadvertently looking at pretty naked woman.
Or, you were referring to bluesky.
This doesn't seem to be the case at all. First two videos it showed me had double digit views. Third one had over a thousand.
That's a sweeping statement that is definitely not true for all cameras Canon has made.
What is strange is actually how we put up with copyright interfering how we communicate to this extend. Sharing a slice of your life as-is should not be something that other people have a say about.
[1] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/musi-simple-music-streaming/id...
Very nice feature, though I haven’t used it myself to say if it works as labeled. It should be an option now when you get a violation warning.
There's not a lot of good faith in that, and it's arguably not valid according to GDPR.
IIRC, the DSC_XXXXXX naming scheme is from Samsung smartphones. (Or maybe just Android in general?)
If the consent form itself is like that, then you already have no trust in the site, let alone asking the question of whether or not a non-duplicitous consent form could or could not be trusted.
Not in... What's in the same time xone, but southern hemisphere; Sawth Effrika?