Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Stolen Cell Phone Shares Thieves' Photos? 133

Posted by Zonk
from the maybe dept.
eastbayted writes "A man from Berkeley, Calif. had his cell phone swiped. Soon after, the ShoZu starting uploading pictures to his Flickr account taken by the thieves — for the world to see. There's one of an unidentified woman eating something chocolatey, and a couple of either a chihuahua or a large rat. Seems this guy had installed some software on his phone to automatically perform those photo uploads, and whoever took his phone didn't realize it That's his story, anyway ... some people doubt it. He's a Yahoo employee. Yahoo owns Flickr. This is all pretty good PR for the photo site, no? He claims: 'People assume I'm doing it for self-promotion, marketing, a hoax or something like that. I'm talking to you because I want it to be known that it's not a hoax. I'm just too ordinary. I'm just too unclever for that.'" Update: 09/02 05:48 GMT by Z : Made the quote more obvious.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stolen Cell Phone Shares Thieves' Photos?

Comments Filter:
  • by dknj (441802) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @12:15AM (#16028649) Journal
    what the fuck?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by rolfwind (528248)
      Yeah, it requires a couple passes because the writing is bad. The different perspectives should have been seperated into paragraphs at least, perhaps with attributions on who said what.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by kantier (993472)
      what the fuck?

      I'd say "what the flickr?"

      (couldn't resist posting it...)

    • It's in the article (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot.kadin@x[ ].net ['oxy' in gap]> on Saturday September 02, 2006 @12:28AM (#16028680) Homepage Journal
      Summary admittedly doesn't make a lot of sense, and the Flickr page is down, but the InfoWorld article isn't too bad.

      Apparently the guy (allegly -- assuming you don't believe it's all some sort of elaborate PR hoax) had some software on his phone that caused photos taken to be automatically posted to his Flickr account. This is pretty reasonable, actually: Flickr lets you post photos via email, so it would just involve programming the phone to automatically send photos to an the address for this. His phone was stolen, and a while later, photos of random people started showing up on his Flickr page, taken by the thief, we assume.

      The real interesting part of the story is not all this, though, it's how it turned into an Internet phenomenon and in particular how a lot of people really tore into him for being a PR flack. Personally I think that the story is probably legit, particularly in hindsight, but a lot of people didn't.

      Apparently after he took so much crap about it being a stunt, he disabled the software and has written off the phone.

      A crappy ending to what could have been a pretty neat story, if you ask me.

      • by in2mind (988476)
        Thats quite interesting

        Assuming that phone does actually have the ability to post pictures to flickr, The pics of the thief & his friends could have also got posted at Flickr - if only the owner had'nt disabled the software.
        • by sammy baby (14909)
          Any cameraphone capable of sending an image via e-mail can upload to Flickr. Once you have a Flickr account, you can generate an upload-by-email address [flickr.com] in the Flickr domain. That's how I post from my phone.

          By extension, anyone who knows your upload-by-email address can post to your photostream too, so make of that what you will.
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        >... A crappy ending to what could have been a pretty neat story, if you ask me. -- If only we could make stupidity more painful... "I knew there was a reason to leave .sigs on. Is it me or is this .sig funny in this context?" OK, maybe not funny, but interesting nonetheless...
      • The real interesting part of the story is not all this, though, it's how it turned into an Internet phenomenon and in particular how a lot of people really tore into him for being a PR flack.

        Yeah, I don't know if anyone else has noticed but there seems to be a rise in the general "OMG it's a conspiracy" reaction for every news worthy event these days. I find it bothersome that if a real world anomaly pops up the automatic reaction is for it to be either a government or business conspiracy. What happened to

        • Blame the marketing companies, who jumped on "viral marketing" starting with "leaners" years back. They are just taking advantage of the same naivete that phishers do and spammers do. And when people start getting burned, they also get more critical.

          It's a natural response to being tricked, you begin to take fewer things on faith.
        • by netwiz (33291)
          Duh. It's because "heroes of truth" are out for exactly that: the truth. The "critical thinking" is realizing the story is false, and designed to get them to do something. It's a talent most of us here possess in better-than-average quantity, reinforced by endless opportunities to experience the scientific method.

          "Humanity" and the "story" are illusions, and fraught with lies about the way things are. We've enough problems with what actually exists, why bother making stuff up? This guy's making an acc
          • "It's because "heroes of truth" are out for exactly that: the truth."

            No they are not. They are after putting forth their own skewed version of reality. That reality for them is a form of cynical "everything that I don't like is a conspiracy". If someone talks about a form of politics that doesn't suit their own reality, it's a "conspiracy". If someone markets a form of product that isn't to their liking, it's a "conspiracy". If someone happens to have a story that becomes popular in news media it's automat

      • If i were that guy, i wouldn't care about the PR crap and would try to pursue the thief (with the phone still plugged in). Of course IF i did a PR stunt which backfired, i would stop it. Granted, i'm not the same guy...
        • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

          by Smallpond (221300)
          What thief?

          It looks to me like the guy left his phone on the train and somebody picked it up and is using it. He wasn't robbed at gunpoint, he's just a loser.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by stunt_penguin (906223)
            Ok I clicked on the dropdown to mod you troll, but decided that an eduction would be more useful to you than a loss of karma.

            First, a quick definition, taken from dictionary.cambridge.org:

            theft : (the act of) dishonestly taking something which belongs to someone else and keeping it:

            Taking that phone was theft, pure and simple. Anyone who picks up a phone from a public space and fails to hand it to the nearest resonably responsible person is committing an act of theft. They are stealing the phone as
            • Meh, I forgot to mention that you could also just attempt to return the phone to the person yourself. You might even get a few bucks in return for the courtesy, which would be an added bonus.

              I managed to return IR£100 (about $150) to someone a few years ago (this was during my first month in Uni) when I found a wad of money outside a parked car and figured the owner had dropped it. I waited about 40 meters away for 10 minutes with a friend, waiting for the person to come back; when it turned out it
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by CCFreak2K (930973)
        A crappy ending to what could have been a pretty neat story, if you ask me.

        The problem is, the story essentially already happened [slashdot.org]. Sure it's kinda neat in that justice sort of way, but it's not that original anymore, and most of the reason people bag on him for PR stunt is because of the connections they make between his place of employment and his photo service of choice.
    • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by Quobobo (709437)
      Not really. It seems like Slashdot's summaries are getting worse and worse lately; it seems like half the editors can't put a basic sentence together, let alone proofread what the submitters write. (mod parent up insightful, by the way)
    • by lintux (125434)
      Not quite, actually I'm reading the comments on this story just to make sure I'm not the only one who couldn't read the summary.
      • by lintux (125434)
        Err, with "not quite" I obviously meant you're not quite the only one who thought that. Oops, seems like I'm as bad as the one who posted this. ;-(

        </offtopic>
  • by GenP (686381)
    "Flickr is having a massage." The hell?
  • Too bad flikr is down... ...scheduled maintenance my arse -- they were /.-ed...
  • Hmmm I wonder if they went down because of Slashdot or just out of coincidence? Odd timing.

    And yes, this is a strange story.
    • Not Slashdotted (Score:3, Informative)

      by Kadin2048 (468275)
      No I think Flickr does its regular maintainance very late on weekend nights (EST). I've run into this before and it's a bit frustrating.

      Just some rather bad timing in posting the story here, I guess.

  • who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by macadamia_harold (947445) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @12:28AM (#16028682) Homepage
    A man from Berkeley, Calif. had his cell phone swiped. Soon after, the ShoZu starting uploading pictures to his Flickr account taken by the thieves

    Well, for $5 a month, Sprint offers a full replacement plan. If someone steals your phone, they void the ESN of the stolen receiver, and they send you a new one. problem solved.
    • I'm talking to you because I want it to be known that it's not a hoax. I'm just too ordinary. I'm just too unclever for that.

      .. and taking my above post one step further, this has to be a hoax, because when you report your cell phone stolen, the phone company will void the ESN so it can't be activated for service.
    • by whoever57 (658626)

      Well, for $5 a month, Sprint offers a full replacement plan. If someone steals your phone, they void the ESN of the stolen receiver, and they send you a new one. problem solved

      That is $60/year. SO if you expect to have a phone stolen once every 3 years, it is equivalent to $180/per phone stolen. You could probably buy a replacement for less on eBay. Heck you could probably buy your own phone back [oregonlive.com] for less.

      • That is $60/year. SO if you expect to have a phone stolen once every 3 years, it is equivalent to $180/per phone stolen.

        Spending $60 on a "no questions asked" replacement policy for a $600 phone is kind of a no brainer. And I do mean "no questions asked". Theft, destruction, malfunction, airline shenanigans with your luggage, basically *whatever*. Believe me, it's worth it.
        • It's not really a "no-brainer" when you consider that $600 phone would be wroth MAX $300 12 months from now.

          Cell phones are pretty much the fastest depreciating things around. They lose about 50% of their value every year. Does your insurance premium go down by that much?
      • by dynamo52 (890601)
        I have what was once a $600 i500. Since i do pay the $6 a month replacement insurance, I have returned it no less than 6 times due to minor mechanical problems. (The button that holds the battery breaks easily when it is dropped). It is a valuable option if you own an expensive phone. Also, since the i500 is about the only PDA flipphone I have found, i prefer a replacement to an upgrade.
    • They also scam you with that stuff. I had a phone for *YEARS* which I deactivated. When my new phone broke I wanted to actiave my old one instead of buy a new one and they claimed it was a stolen phone and wouldn't activate it :)
    • Idiot Tax (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Frankie70 (803801) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @04:40AM (#16028991)

      Well, for $5 a month, Sprint offers a full replacement plan.


      That's the idiot tax.

      In a 10 years period, you would have paid 600$. You
      would have to lose phones pretty frequently to break
      even.

      • It's not about breaking even. Most people can afford $5 a month, but to pay $600 for the cost of a new phone in one go, especially when you don't expect it, can be slightly more difficult.
        • by Frankie70 (803801)
          Then put 5$ in a "lock box" every month instead of giving it
          to Sprint.
          Even better put it in the back. At the end of 10 years it will be
          worth 700$ even at a moderate rate of interest.
          • What happens if your phone is stolen in the first three months, when it's at its most desirable?

            Can you buy a new phone with the $15 in your box?
            • by Frankie70 (803801)

              What happens if your phone is stolen in the first three months, when it's at its most desirable?

              Can you buy a new phone with the $15 in your box?


              After you get you get your replacement phone, you will still continue
              to pay 5$ per month for the next 9 years 9 months, right?

              That's why I am considering a 10 year period.
              You may have 1 new phone stolen in the first 3 months. But over a 10 year
              if you have too many phones stolen, you probably shouldn't be carrying
              a phone around.
              • by deesine (722173)
                "But over a 10 year if you have too many phones stolen, you probably shouldn't be carrying a phone around."

                Or you could just pay the $5/month. Jeez!

        • The problem is that most phones cost a couple hundred bucks, not $600. Sure, if you have the latest super-Palm device that cost $600 bucks in the first place and you're paying $120 bucks every month for service, then 5 bucks a month is nothing. Then again, if you're paying that (and not your employer), then I personally think you probably fall into the idiot category anyways...
          • The problem is that most phones cost a couple hundred bucks, not $600

            If that, and they depreciate really fast. After a year, a 'phone is pretty hard to sell for enough to even cover the effort of listing it on eBay and posting it.

            Stealing a mobile 'phone doesn't make a lot of sense. They are usually disabled within 24 hours of being stolen these days (in the UK), so you need to fence them really fast. At that speed, you would be lucky to get 25% of market value. If you have a top-of-the-line 'phon

        • by Frankie70 (803801)

          Most people can afford $5 a month, but to pay $600 for the cost of a new phone in one go, especially when you don't expect it, can be slightly more difficult.


          Another thing, if paying 600$ at one go is difficult, you shouldn't be purchasing
          a 600$ cell phone in the first place.

      • by FatAlb3rt (533682)
        Lemme guess, you think home, medical, and auto insurance fall into the same category? Or are you tossing your nickels into a jar for those too?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Frankie70 (803801)

          Lemme guess, you think home, medical, and auto insurance fall into the same category?


          Insurance is basically a scam - it's meant to benefit the insurance company &
          not the insured.

          You should insure only when the loss will be unaffordable.
          Home, Medical & auto insurance fall into this category.
          (Auto because of lawsuits).

          Even out that there, you should be choosing your deductibles
          smartly to reduce your premium.

          For an auto insurance, keep your deductibles as the maximum
          you can afford to pay without becomi
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Home insurance is basically unavoidable so long as you still have a mortgage. The bank wants its collateral protected. It's illegal in most states to drive without auto insurance (of course, you can get away with liability-only). Medical insurance is certainly a necessity, but nearly 40 million Americans are doing without.

          So, yes, they're necessities. But you should practice self-insurance against non-catastrophic losses. Extended warranties and product replacement plans are usually bad deals. If you
      • Really? Because my Treo was $600 brand new, and I broke it after a month. Good thing I got the replacement plan! ;)
  • I guess I'm just out of the whole cell phone thing so I have to ask... is it even possible to install software on a cell phone that will automatically take pictures and upload to Flickr? First of all, do phones have a "cron" type functionality that can fire off programs on a schedule? Do users have access to any of this? I Can a user upload an arbitrary program to their phone and have it run? I thought your provider pretty much controlled what your phone can do and what programs are on it.

    -matthew
    • Re:Possible? (Score:4, Informative)

      by dangitman (862676) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @01:14AM (#16028746)
      I guess I'm just out of the whole cell phone thing so I have to ask... is it even possible to install software on a cell phone that will automatically take pictures and upload to Flick

      I'm not sure why you ask about automatically taking pictures with a "cron" function - because that is not part of the story. Apparently the photos were manually snapped by the alleged thief, or someone in possession of the phone. The phone just automatically uploads new images taken by the user. As for the automatic photographing - why not? You can get software to do just about anything with your phone - time-based things like alarms are available. So I don't see why you couldn't do the autmatic picture-taking.

      I Can a user upload an arbitrary program to their phone and have it run? I thought your provider pretty much controlled what your phone can do and what programs are on it.

      Depends on what phone you have, and who your provider is. My Nokia runs the Symbian OS, and I can write software, or buy/download thousands of different applications for it. Not sure why this seems so far-fetched to you.

      • by misleb (129952)
        Like I said, I am out of the cell phone thing. I don't own one anymore and when I did, it was always a very basic phone that didn't do much more than keep a few (and I do mean a few!) phone numbers and maybe play some stupid Java game that took 5 minutes to load. For some reason I was under the impression that a service provider had near absolute control over your phone except for the ability to install bad pop songs as ring tones.
        • My 'phone (a year old, not top-of-the-line then) has an ARM9 CPU and runs Symbian. It has 35MB of internal storage space and an RS-MMC slot.

          It is, effectively, a general purpose computer, running a general purpose OS. It has more CPU power and RAM than the computer I was using as my main machine 10 years ago and it comes with a full SDK.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by snillfisk (111062)
        It's just not possible, it also opens up quite a few new possibilities. As part of my master thesis we fitted a mobile phone with a camera in the front of a car, linked the phone to a bluetooth gps and recorded both the view and the path of the road in the landscape. It also uploaded the images and position directly to a web site, so viewers could track both the vehicle and the view online.

        The norwegian road authorities apparently does something similiar when doing road maintenance, and have stored 18m+ pi
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by in2mind (988476)
      Yes it is.

      Instructions for posting to Flickr from Cameraphone: http://www.flickr.com/get_the_most.gne#cameraphon e [flickr.com]

      From Nokia to Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/nokia/upload/n93/ [flickr.com]

      Choose "Options" -> "Upload"

      From that page,it seems users have to manually upload the pictures to Flickr.I dont find a option to AUTOMATICALLY post every new picture.

    • Modern phones run software. Most users have control over devices they own .

      I thought your provider pretty much controlled what your phone can do and what programs are on it.

      Only if your phone is tied to your service provider and your agreement with said provider / firmware controlled by them prevents you from running your own software. Would you be surprised to hear that some people can run arbitrary code on their own computers without being prevented from doing so by their ISP?

      If your way of thinking
      • by misleb (129952)

        Only if your phone is tied to your service provider and your agreement with said provider / firmware controlled by them prevents you from running your own software. Would you be surprised to hear that some people can run arbitrary code on their own computers without being prevented from doing so by their ISP?

        You're just being condescending. I haven't owned a cell phone since they've become more general purpose devices. I was ASKING if and how it is possible to do somthing such as in TFA. I didn't know. Pa

        • Sorry if it seemed condescending - I did notice you mentioned not having a cell phone. It's just surprising that someone on a site like Slashdot would think you cannot run your own software on your own phone, which to me would indicate that's what most people "not in the know" think.
  • "just too unclever for that"

    and

    "having a massage"

    I can't imaging what's next
  • by WidescreenFreak (830043) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @12:33AM (#16028692) Homepage Journal
    http://www.evanwashere.com/StolenSidekick/ [evanwashere.com]

    A similar thing happened a few months ago when a T-Mobile Sidekick was stolen. Apparently, T-Mobile stores a copy of all of your data and photos on their servers so that if you switch phones you have access to all of your data and photos. The "thief" apparently wasn't aware of this and was soon identified because of the photos that she took of herself and her neighborhood. It's a long story, but an interesting read.
    • A similar thing happened a few months ago when a T-Mobile Sidekick was stolen.


      I can't believe nobody else remembers this other event happening just months ago. It ended with arrests and stuff.
      • by mikael (484)
        I've notice this with some slashdot stories - an interest story can be pushed off the front page if there is a flurry of new stories (10 or more). I read slashdot maybe two or three times a day, and managed to miss this story:

        Stolen Laptop Calls In! - Will Police Act? [slashdot.org]
    • The length to content ratio of the Reuters/InfoWorld article is way too high. Here's a more succinct version:

      The phone, the thief, his wife and a Chihuahua?
      September 01, 2006
      (Reuters) - "Me too! [evanwashere.com]" said Web designer Ben Clemens.
    • by pimpimpim (811140)
      from tfa:

      He told me to come to an address in Corona Queens because he got ball and hed give me the Sidekick so he could hit me wit it. I informed them that I had all their pics, their email/screen name and would post this online. They informed me that they had the white little biyotch info who owned the phone and would post that online too.

      What I like about this day and age, is that it's apparently more worrying to have photo's of you put on the internet, than to be beaten up. This shows how the inter

  • Wired [wired.com] ran a story similar to this one last year about a Sanyo 5500 phone that had the ability to upload photos and movies to the Sprint site.
  • by Desolator144 (999643) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @01:18AM (#16028757)
    "...he is not seeking justice, revenge, or even his mobile phone. He would quite like his life back" Oh yes, a stolen phone ruined his whole life. Now he has to go live in a box in an alley wishing he could have his life back. Is it just me or does everyone think it's odd that he should have logically not told anyone about what was going on until the thief took a picture that would give enough evidence to get himself captured? If my phone got stolen (well okay, I don't own one and never have) I'd be kinda pissed and want revenge, especially if it was likely it would be handed to me as easily as having the offender take a picture of his car or house or something.
    • by snowgirl (978879)
      The person addresses this, in that he was only ever expecting this issue to be a private one. But in a true lesson of the internet, it was revealed that something can catch the internet bubble and become a craze that everyone wants a part in. This person is upset about the time lost of his life because everyone is bothering him about this stupid cellphone.

      To him, having the cellphone or getting "revenge" just isn't worth the effort that he's even put in so far (having the pictures automatically uploaded t
      • ...and in another true lesson learned on the internet, once it's out there, you can't get it back.

        A lesson not yet learned by the RIAA, and similar agencies. Pandora's box is open, guys.
    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "...he is not seeking justice, revenge, or even his mobile phone. He would quite like his life back" Oh yes, a stolen phone ruined his whole life.

      I wouldn't be so quick to pin the quote on him (in fact, it's not a quote at all.)

      Saying someone "just wants their life back" is hack reporting 101, especially when the deadline is near and the writer needs a quick line to tie everything together.
  • by Tablizer (95088)
    It was not a phone that was stolen, but rather story credibility here. Perhaps this is a Lojack PR stunt, not a Flickr one.
  • O RLY? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tarmas (954439) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @01:32AM (#16028780) Homepage
    People assume I'm doing it for self-promotion, marketing, a hoax or something like that. I'm talking to you because I want it to be known that it's not a hoax. I'm just too ordinary. I'm just too unclever for that.

    O RLY? Take a look at this pic [flickr.com], supposedly taken with the stolen camera phone, then at this one [avtoindex.com], the first result for "Chavelle" on Google Images. Looks familiar? And I'm not taking his lame excuses.
    • Re:O RLY? (Score:5, Informative)

      by in2mind (988476) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @01:55AM (#16028812) Homepage
      Thats interesting.

      Probably thats why he put this disclamier on Flickr for the car pic:

      - Taken at 12:24 AM on August 17, 2006; cameraphone upload by ShoZu this is apparently a picture from another web site, streetfire. I didn't upload it to my photostream, I am not sure how it got here.
  • I was checking out the pics again. The rat-huahua shots are still there, but the picture of the woman eating the brownie, which had been marked as taken by the thief, is now "private" and thus unviewable. Not that it's that great a shot... Still curious.
    • I'm not sure why it's assumed the woman eating the brownie isn't the thief. Chicks can be criminals, too. All the evidence that he has right now points to two suspects. A chihuahua and a chocoholic girl. Personally, I think the chihuahua did it, but I wouldn't rule out the girl.
  • Suspicious (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mr2cents (323101)
    > 'I'm just too unclever for that.'

    I wouldn't trust a guy who speaks newspeak and has a camera-phone, uploading pictures automatically. IMO he's thought-police..
  • Didn't this happen before or is this the same old boring story? I didn't even bother reading it because either way the perpetrators are morons.

    HINT: If you steal a phone, do not take pictures of yourself and make them public. This is almost the same as leaving your wallet at a bank after you rob it.
  • Hoax (Score:2, Troll)

    by jazman (9111)
    Presumably the photos on the site are in some sort of order - order of taking, or order of upload perhaps? This might be wrong of course.

    But what strikes me is that there are photos that are obviously his both before and after the "thief's" photos. So either it's a hoax, or Flickr for some reason inserts your latest photos halfway down the list. Or he got his phone back. Any other options?
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Maybe he manually posted some photos since the event? It's not like uploading photos from your phone is the only way you can post on Flickr.
    • Any photos in your flickr stream are inserted in upload-time order. You can re-order "sets" by "taken" time, for example, but the stream of photos is in the order they were uploaded. This includes camera phones, real cameras, e-mailed uploads and those done with juploadr to name a few.
  • Update ! (Score:2, Funny)

    by french_user (996372)
    The picture of the husband has just arrived : http://pix.nofrag.com/28/4b/68359f899f1cd65ff0f073 fc993f.html [nofrag.com]
  • Can anybody tell me what a ShoZu is? I could barely make sense of this and the site is down right now. I'll actually come back and check to see if I have replies this time, promise.
  • Sure, he uploads to Flickr, but had he installed some sort of update mechanism (manual from his own website or 3rd party tool), it might have activated the GPS features (if available on his phone) and location tagging now available on Flickr. Then maybe he'd actually get that phone back. As it currently is, it's most likely the thieves will just laugh when they read this, and start uploading more graphic pictures (and break into his Flickr account now that they know the password is on there somewhere).

    Hmm
  • Hes running ShoZhu on his Nokia 6682 - its a nice phone and is maybe 250-300 bucks with a contract so I'd get pissed if it was stolen. I don't see why this would be a hoax - its a previously released cell phone so hes not trying to do some new product hype. There would be simpler ways of getting an upgrade for it. This is classic name-n-shame like the sidekick guy from a few months ago. Maybe he'll get it back and it doesn't hurt to wish him luck. A cell phone got stolen though - big deal. Eds why is this o
  • And they got caught.

    Yahoo's financials have not been that great lately. They recently overhauled their message boards, and the result is so bad that their message board traffic plummeted.

    Yahoo has a problem - not enough traffic to their content sites. This lame ploy is some marketing person's failed attempt to drive up traffic.

  • Know him pretty well, used to work with him during the dotcom boom in NYC and almost worked with him in London during the fallout.

    I doubt, very much, this is some kind of marketing ploy or otherwise, it would be well below Ben's character to participate in such a thing. Besides, I believe he's just a creative director and why would Yahoo tap their CD to do such a thing, doesn't make any sense.

    So put the tin foil hats back on, I can 99.9% for certain say this is legit.
    • I doubt, very much, this is some kind of marketing ploy or otherwise, it would be well below Ben's character to participate in such a thing.

      Wouldn't that make him the perfect target?

      After all, don't enough people work at Yahoo for them not to all know each other?

      I think someone else at Yahoo/Flickr (who knew his phone was stolen) gained access to his account information [sysadmin?] and started uploading the photos...

      Makes a great PR ploy...

      or even makes a great prank....

      The sincerity and integrity of thus g
  • Doesn't Make Sence (Score:3, Insightful)

    by matth (22742) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @11:17AM (#16029824) Homepage
    If his cell bill and service were canceled (i.e. he notified the carrier about the stolen phone) then how did it send the pictures.. eh eh?

"Flattery is all right -- if you don't inhale." -- Adlai Stevenson

Working...