Instagram starts filtering out hipster pics on Twitter Instagram has disabled the ability of Twitter users to view its photo-futzed images in full, and CEO Kevin Systrom says he eventually wants people to come to his site rather than any other platform. Systrom says the move is because Instagram has made a number of improvements in its own site and apps, and it thinks users will …
I have never used instagram and after reading this never will.
"I think this is an evolution of where we are with where we want links with our content to go," Systrom told the LeWeb technology conference on Wednesday
Sorry but the only reason this sort of "social" site works is because of the members content. What an arrogant idiot.
"All that content belongs to Zuckerberg."
Sort of, yes... but the more valuable thing to Instagram and Facebook is the continuing flow of content from the users into their sites. The moment that flow dries up, all of the current content becomes all but valueless in the eyes of shareholders.
I noticed that twitter wasn't displaying them any more when quite few posts didn't show them. I didn't bother going to the site to look at the pictures. I can't imagine I'm the only one. I imagine their use will diminish very significantly once people realise fewer people look at their pictures, it's not like there aren't many alternatives.
Really, man... what the hell is it with all these CEOs breaking the Goofy Meter these days -- and managing to actually be rewarded for it, to boot? It's almost like an epidemic of sociopathy, and it seems to be especially bad among the CEOs of tinhorn Internet outfits like Instagram -- and they're being positively reinforced, so they get even goofier. It's like they're batshit and proud, and right up front about it, and they don't give a damn how many people can clearly see that they're batshit.
They're like the kind of characters you see in articles in The Onion, or in old SNL sketches -- except they aren't parodies, but real actual people. If it didn't adversely affect so many people, I'd actually find their behavior entertaining.
This is typical of all the big players on the web trying to get you to use their "experience" exclusively.
Open web, open tools. If you provide decent services users will come. Once you start building walls to keep them in they will leave. This has happened over and over again. People are not stupid and getting people to use only one website will never happen because there is always a better mousetrap out there.
Just wondering... not that I'd be caught dead using it, but would anybody know if Instagram has the option for downloading the image as a .jpg -- so then you could just manually post the image to your Twitter feed via TwitPic? I mean, how tough could that be?
(Disclaimer: I use Twitter fairly regularly, Facebook sparsely, but, in fact, would not be caught dead using Instagram to post brand-new fotos digitally butchered to look like thirty year-old Polaroids)
It stores it in /instagram on your phone (on android at least).
Thanks for the tip. Still, I don't own an iPhone or Android -- but if I did, I still wouldn't touch Instagram with somebody else's ten-foot pole.
I was just curious, though, as when I come out with a new cartoon on my blog, I post it to Twitter via email, using the email link I have to my TwitPic account (and, I also do this with any interesting fotos I take on the street). Seems any hipster with two brain cells to rub together -- yeah, a mutually exclusive expression, I know -- could tweet his crappily-butchered Instagram images the same way. Any Instagram luser who's actually stymied by this boneheaded corporate move would have to be hopelessly and irredeemably st00pid.
Just share the version saved to your photo gallery, then. Simples!
Used to like instagram for the first 5 minutes before you had to trawl through thousands of 'selfies' and advertising pics to see any genuinely creative or thought-provoking pics. The last straw was when i recently posted a pic and instantly got 6 likes, all from 'users' with stuff to sell or promote.
Facebook and instagram - great ideas, but now teetering giants.
...for the first 5 minutes before you had to trawl through thousands of 'selfies' and advertising pics to see any genuinely creative or thought-provoking pics. The last straw was when i recently posted a pic and instantly got 6 likes, all from 'users' with stuff to sell or promote.
That happened to me when I first set up my Twitter account. Spent five or ten minutes poking around on my feed, getting the hang of the interface and such, and in that short time I'd racked up about ten "followers", all of whom were "hotties in my area" or 'bot profiles with fake "selfies" ripped off from some other site all claiming to just adore the tweets I was posting and supposedly dying to meet me. I blocked and reported them for spamming, of course, and learned how to spot 'bot and spam followers real goddamn' fast. Happily, that bullshit subsided fairly quickly.
I was actually pretty surprised that didn't happen when I set up my Facebook account. Granted, I hardly ever log on there, I gave FB totally fake gender/residence/birthday info, and left all those personal interest, profession and education fields blank, but, still, I was genuinely surprised at not being deluged with fake friend requests from Hot Guys In Tripoli Who Were Wanting To Meet Me Now.
This post has been deleted by its author
I take issue with the pointlessness. It has at least inspired the new H&M advertising campaign. Wow! Progress not only goes "boink!" but also is also slightly over-exposed. What will they think of next? Watches powered by microelectronics, no doubt.
There's a pint in it for anyone who gets *all* the references,
This post has been deleted by its author
How? I don't have it, and now apparently if I were to use Twitter (which I don't) I wouldn't be able to use it for hipster identification.
Presumably now I will have to pay Zuckerberg for his list of self-important, gullible and technically illiterate people who wouldn't recognise a good photo if Ansel Adams explained it to them in person, with examples.
I spent (nearly) 10 minutes trying to figure out *how* to link to an image that is on Facebook today. Could only figure out how to share it within FB. Sure I didn't try very hard--why would I?
I try to avoid FB anyway, just I have a few friends who seem as hopelessly trapped by the Facebook's garden walls as my parents used to be by AOL. Which is sad.
The deluge of what pases for content on larger social sites makes quality almost irrelel=vant. While quantity may well have a quality all of its own, it isn't an aesthetic one. If twenty people haven't liked your latest purple tint of a door, or unfocussed portrait of some dorks on the razzle within an hour of posting, then it's in the dustbin of history....a day early.
A tog friend of mine is fond of saying: "Any twat can take a shit photo, but it takes a special kind of twat to publish it"
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
