7 ms·

If it's between this and a perpetual logo, I'll take this any day. I actually really like this approach. The action button isn't relevant in this context, and

by jjcm 1mo ago

If it's between this and a perpetual logo, I'll take this any day. I actually really like this approach. The action button isn't relevant in this context, and it doesn't occlude the content. There's certainly situations where you wouldn't want this (ie if you're developing the app and you want to redesign starting from a screenshot), but for the average user I think this isn't overly hostile. I understand that people are dogmatically opposed to intent being modified, but I think you need to balance nuance. I actually enjoy having an attributable source in shared elements, and I think this is a low-impact way of achieving that.

pembrook 1mo ago
[flagged]
- computably 1mo ago
  Uh, no? I highly doubt that a non-occluding watermark on screenshots is even in the top 100 gripes most people have with X. And I don't use either platform. If anything your argument is an accusation of bias without any discussion of merits.
  - Petersipoi 1mo ago
    Not sure why you think anyone is suggesting that non-occluding watermarks are a gripe people have with X. GP is saying that BS gets a pass where X would not for a user hostile action.
    - irishcoffee 1mo ago
      Yeah, the dead comment really cements the bias of hn despite what people claim. I don’t use either platform, I have no interest in the debate. As an outsider looking in, the bias has been proven. Not that it matters much, I am left-of-center generally speaking.
      - saghm 1mo ago
        I don't think this says a whole lot about the direction of people's political views here as much as there being a general disdain for arbitrary claims of political bias that aren't based on any discernible evidence. I feel pretty confident that if I jumped into a random thread about some feature in the Brave browser and accused someone of defending it only because they agreed with Brendan Eich on Prop 8, I would get flagged too.
      - alex1138 1mo ago
        re: dead, I agree. I'm so tired of flags killing discussion. This site is highly regimented What I want, as someone who vaguely leaned left and has gotten... less so, since certain revelations, are platforms that work. Where you can't just get booted off for things that are not-boot-off-worthy (sorry. wording sucks). In that view, Bluesky is something I'm interested in as a protocol. It should be something the Left and Right can both use, regardless of the people it tends to attract
        zapzupnz 1mo ago
        From your profile: > "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." = censorship. Unaccountable [flag] = censorship. > Mass un-elaborated on downvoting = censorship; needing 500 karma to downvote = censorship. > Turn on showdead in your profile and see for yourself what people are "allowed" to comment vs what they're not. Userbase = mendacious pricks. Apparently everything is censorship and everybody else is a prick. It's always someone else's fault. There's never responsibility taken for mean-spiritedness or rule violations. Ever considered that if this is the hill you're dying on, your takes are just terrible and getting flagged is just this site's natural selection? No, it's everyone else who is wrong? OK then. I mean, the dead comment in this one is dead because of: "You're just defending Bluesky because you're on the same team politically" which is an unnecessarily unkind, snarky, uncurious way to communicate. That last paragraph was unnecessary but it tainted the entire post. From the site rules: > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." > Don't be curmudgeonly. > Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. > Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. But, of course, it's everybody else's problem, never yours, never the owner of the dead comment.
    - saghm 1mo ago
      From reading through a lot of comments on this thread, I'm honestly struggling to notice any super obvious pattern or bias other than the amount that people care about how screenshots work compared to the average person is a lot.
- ramraj07 1mo ago
  Consider the possibility that many HN users, who likely also constantly ask why mice are needed when vim/Emacs exist, are not the users who mostly use regular apps.
subjectleft 1mo ago
It is strange how this spawned a 100+ comments discussion on HN.
- TeMPOraL 29d ago
  It's not about the logo. It's about abusing a platform feature that arguably shouldn't exist in the first place.
blauditore 29d ago
I actually hate that apps are allowed to blank out content on screenshots, and this can't be disabled. There are apps completely mis-using it, e.g. mobile payment apps which hardly show any sensitive data in most cases, but now I can't share e.g. infos on screen with someone else easily. It's a classic case of someone discovering a feature and thinking "hell yeah, so much security" without understanding or caring about UX impications. I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing.
- TeMPOraL 29d ago
  > I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing. Yes, this. Payment apps, government apps, IM communications. The other day I almost rooted my phone in anger trying to get around this, before pausing and realizing that this would only cause even more problems with those apps, thanks to remote attestation "features". My favorite recent case, I almost locked myself out of mobile government services when changing phones recently[0], and it would've made for a stellar bug report showing when "fail safe" design can easily become "fail deadly"[1], with UI view of access and invalidation history clearly showing the timeline of a problem... if only I could take a screenshot of it. But I can't, because "much sekhurity". -- [0] - Well, it's not really that big of a deal. With government services, there's always a way back. Might involve walking to a local civil affairs office or, worst case, a police station or a notary, but there is a way back. Big cloud services, on the other hand... [1] - Invalidating a certificate prior to issuing a new one sounds like a good security idea, but in the real world fails critically if the two operations aren't an atomic group. In my case, issuing a new certificate failed, and I ended up walking around for half a day with old one invalidated and not even knowing it.
  - Perz1val 29d ago
    Then they deserve you taking a photo with a second phone
    - 29d ago

by jjcm 1mo ago

pembrook 1mo ago

[flagged]

computably 1mo ago
Uh, no? I highly doubt that a non-occluding watermark on screenshots is even in the top 100 gripes most people have with X. And I don't use either platform. If anything your argument is an accusation of bias without any discussion of merits.
- Petersipoi 1mo ago
  Not sure why you think anyone is suggesting that non-occluding watermarks are a gripe people have with X. GP is saying that BS gets a pass where X would not for a user hostile action.
  - irishcoffee 1mo ago
    Yeah, the dead comment really cements the bias of hn despite what people claim. I don’t use either platform, I have no interest in the debate. As an outsider looking in, the bias has been proven. Not that it matters much, I am left-of-center generally speaking.
    - saghm 1mo ago
      I don't think this says a whole lot about the direction of people's political views here as much as there being a general disdain for arbitrary claims of political bias that aren't based on any discernible evidence. I feel pretty confident that if I jumped into a random thread about some feature in the Brave browser and accused someone of defending it only because they agreed with Brendan Eich on Prop 8, I would get flagged too.
    - alex1138 1mo ago
      re: dead, I agree. I'm so tired of flags killing discussion. This site is highly regimented What I want, as someone who vaguely leaned left and has gotten... less so, since certain revelations, are platforms that work. Where you can't just get booted off for things that are not-boot-off-worthy (sorry. wording sucks). In that view, Bluesky is something I'm interested in as a protocol. It should be something the Left and Right can both use, regardless of the people it tends to attract
      - zapzupnz 1mo ago
        From your profile: > "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." = censorship. Unaccountable [flag] = censorship. > Mass un-elaborated on downvoting = censorship; needing 500 karma to downvote = censorship. > Turn on showdead in your profile and see for yourself what people are "allowed" to comment vs what they're not. Userbase = mendacious pricks. Apparently everything is censorship and everybody else is a prick. It's always someone else's fault. There's never responsibility taken for mean-spiritedness or rule violations. Ever considered that if this is the hill you're dying on, your takes are just terrible and getting flagged is just this site's natural selection? No, it's everyone else who is wrong? OK then. I mean, the dead comment in this one is dead because of: "You're just defending Bluesky because you're on the same team politically" which is an unnecessarily unkind, snarky, uncurious way to communicate. That last paragraph was unnecessary but it tainted the entire post. From the site rules: > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." > Don't be curmudgeonly. > Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. > Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. But, of course, it's everybody else's problem, never yours, never the owner of the dead comment.
  - saghm 1mo ago
    From reading through a lot of comments on this thread, I'm honestly struggling to notice any super obvious pattern or bias other than the amount that people care about how screenshots work compared to the average person is a lot.
ramraj07 1mo ago
Consider the possibility that many HN users, who likely also constantly ask why mice are needed when vim/Emacs exist, are not the users who mostly use regular apps.

subjectleft 1mo ago

It is strange how this spawned a 100+ comments discussion on HN.

TeMPOraL 29d ago
It's not about the logo. It's about abusing a platform feature that arguably shouldn't exist in the first place.

blauditore 29d ago

I actually hate that apps are allowed to blank out content on screenshots, and this can't be disabled. There are apps completely mis-using it, e.g. mobile payment apps which hardly show any sensitive data in most cases, but now I can't share e.g. infos on screen with someone else easily. It's a classic case of someone discovering a feature and thinking "hell yeah, so much security" without understanding or caring about UX impications. I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing.

TeMPOraL 29d ago
> I've yet to see someone saying "oh, I'm so glad my screenshot was blacked-out because I didn't realize I was in a banking app". It feels patronizing. Yes, this. Payment apps, government apps, IM communications. The other day I almost rooted my phone in anger trying to get around this, before pausing and realizing that this would only cause even more problems with those apps, thanks to remote attestation "features". My favorite recent case, I almost locked myself out of mobile government services when changing phones recently[0], and it would've made for a stellar bug report showing when "fail safe" design can easily become "fail deadly"[1], with UI view of access and invalidation history clearly showing the timeline of a problem... if only I could take a screenshot of it. But I can't, because "much sekhurity". -- [0] - Well, it's not really that big of a deal. With government services, there's always a way back. Might involve walking to a local civil affairs office or, worst case, a police station or a notary, but there is a way back. Big cloud services, on the other hand... [1] - Invalidating a certificate prior to issuing a new one sounds like a good security idea, but in the real world fails critically if the two operations aren't an atomic group. In my case, issuing a new certificate failed, and I ended up walking around for half a day with old one invalidated and not even knowing it.
- Perz1val 29d ago
  Then they deserve you taking a photo with a second phone
  - 29d ago