All the starters:

Dinner

O’Connell Street Christmas Tree

O’Connell Street

Darren on Henry Street

I had a fantastic Christmas Eve. Dublin Does it well. The weather was a little weird though. Blue skies and just a little chilly. This time two years ago it was 26°C colder than this year!

Christmas Tree at Smithfield

Powerscourt Shopping Centre

Powerscourt Shopping Centre

Darren in Powerscourt Shopping Centre

Grafton Street

Grafton Street

Darren on Grafton Street

Sexy Sax Guy, he is not

Update
Instagram have now fully reverted to their original terms and are scrapping the possible advertising plans. In a statement Kevin Systrom, Instagram co-founder, said:

He also made it very clear that “We don’t own your photos – you do.”

As predicted, Instagram have clarified their modification to the Terms of Service that sent the internet into a flurry yesterday. By “clarified” what they really did was admit that they made a mistake and attempt to bring back the users who were thinking of leaving.

Kevin Systrom said in an update:

I’m writing this today to let you know we’re listening and to commit to you that we will be doing more to answer your questions, fix any mistakes, and eliminate the confusion. As we review your feedback and stories in the press, we’re going to modify specific parts of the terms to make it more clear what will happen with your photos.

Some day, someone in social network companies other than lawyers will read over new terms of service before publishing them.

— Stuart Gibson (@stuartgibson) December 18, 2012

To put it simply, Instagram thought of a way of making money by allowing advertisers to use the data and images uploaded in order to create ads. No, not ugly banner ads, but something that might actually be useful. This is what we want! Gone are the days where men would be inflicted with ads for panty liners or tampons, instead we receive advertising based on the things which are actually suited to us, based on the stuff we like, the stuff we look at etc.

This is what Facebook does. But as MG Siegler says, many people have issue with Facebook for this very reason. I don’t understand it either:

That’s the thing: why was the default thought here to assume that Instagram was out to do something nefarious? Because Facebook now owns the company? Why is it the default thinking that Facebook is out to do something nefarious?

I’m currently being fed ads for Walkers’ Sensations Crisps — which I’m currently</> munching! — something from Tesco, a photography forum — I do like photography, Starbucks — I do enjoy coffee, a “gift for him” from Boots and items from a Jewellers — because I’m in a relationship? This is stuff I may have a use for. This is why cookies are good. This is why personalised advertising is a good idea. Google is no different. Gmail also trawls your emails for clues as to what advertisements to serve you!

However, this was not clearly spelled out by Instagram, nor their lawyers, and this is where they went wrong:

The language we proposed also raised question about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement. We do not have plans for anything like this and because of that we’re going to remove the language that raised the question. Our main goal is to avoid things like advertising banners you see in other apps that would hurt the Instagram user experience. Instead, we want to create meaningful ways to help you discover new and interesting accounts and content while building a self-sustaining business at the same time.

Nilay Patel explains what the new language means in terms we can understand:

The new terms actually make things clearer and — importantly — more limited. That “on, about, or in conjunction” with language is dead and gone. Now you’re only agreeing that someone else can pay Instagram to display your photos and other information only in connection with paid or sponsored content. These phrases have very specific meanings — Instagram can’t sell your photos to anyone, for example. It simply doesn’t have permission. And Budweiser isn’t allowed to crop your photo of a bar, slap a logo on it, and run it as an ad on Instagram — that would go well beyond “display” and into modification, which Instagram doesn’t have a license to do. (In fact, the old Instagram terms allowed for modification, but the new ones don’t — they actually got better for users in that regard.) In technical legal terms, Instagram doesn’t have the right to create a “derivative work” under 17 USC §106. The company can’t sell your photos, and it can’t take your photos and change them in any meaningful way.

So what can Instagram do? Well, an advertiser can pay Instagram to display your photos in a way that doesn’t create anything new — so Budweiser can put up a box in the timeline that says “our favorite Instagram photos of this bar!” and put user photos in there, but it can’t take those photos and modify them, or combine them with other content to create a new thing. Putting a logo on your photo would definitely break the rules. But putting a logo somewhere near your photos? That would probably be okay.

Some, like Mat Honan of Wired Magazine, did quit Instagram yesterday. I wonder if he regrets it today? He has updated his post adding “Without a clear commitment on its end, I’m not making a clear commitment either: In short, I still want options.” So… he hasn’t committed to quitting or has he? And what of the others who jumped ship? I believe they jumped the gun.

On the issue of copyright, Sam Biddle of Gizmodo has it very wrong. Whether or not these images are “throwaway” or “dumb” that is a bad and completely irrelevant argument. The issue is whether companies can make money of our data and content. Our intellectual property. There is a lot more to be discussed about the value of the content we put online, and more importantly, who owns it. Bottom line is: if you don’t want your content used by products and services online don’t upload your content to the websites of free products and serices. Or at least read the terms before you do so. Fine with all that? Then carry on.

I will be staying put for now.

“We may share User Content and your information (including but not limited to, information from cookies, log files, device identifiers, location data, and usage data) with businesses that are legally part of the same group of companies that Instagram is part of, or that become part of that group (“Affiliates”). Affiliates may use this information to help provide, understand, and improve the Service (including by providing analytics) and Affiliates’ own services (including by providing you with better and more relevant experiences). But these Affiliates will honor the choices you make about who can see your photos.”

There are a number of points to be made about this, some cynical, and some to be taken seriously.

Really? Tell me you didnt suspect that all those free sites with limited revenue ideas weren’t going to steal something from you.

— jon levy – Foto8 (@foto8) December 18, 2012

On the cynical, half-truth, note: we all (100 million of us) signed up to a free service and willingly gave them our content. Our content. Our content And what did we expect them to do with the content? After all, they are in the business of making money, and believe it or not, the internet is becoming less “free” every day. That which is “free” is paid for by reams of advertisements, or indeed by you. If you want something, you must pay for it. You are the product etc.

Too many people are “scared” of the internet; the big social networks, search engines, services etc. But it’s really very simple: if you don’t want someone to know something, don’t put it on the internet. Or, find an alternative. Want a search engine without personalised search and tracking? Try DuckDuckGo. Fed up with Facebook? Why not migrate to Diaspora? Or maybe the revamped Myspace? But you don’t jump ship, you stay where your friends are, and you learn to accept that it isn’t a free for all, it isn’t a democracy, and if you want something to be private don’t put it on the Internet. Sure you can lock down your account — go private. But how “private” do you really believe that is? And what value do you get from it? Operate a covert operation of mouthing off to a select few people of whom you don’t know and will never have a real connection with. But then you could get a pen and paper and begin with “Dear Diary…”

For those truly interested Terms of Service; Didn’t read has rated a number of free online web services by the way in which they handle the terms and privacy policies. As is stated, before the recent update, Instagram’s terms included the right for Instagram to distribute through any media, whereas now this right is also transferred to Facebook.

Sure it’s not very nice of Instagram/Facebook to sell your pictures to advertisers, however this is nothing new. Twitpic made a similar move in May 2011 to prevent users from selling or distributing their own images which had been uploaded to the service. This was then changed and everyone was happy. But few are aware that most photo sharing service have similar clauses: they own your data. While it is often in the best interests of the company to ask for and get the rights they can in order to display and reproduce content, many will abuse this right.

I will, however, leave Instagram unless they alter these terms before they come into effect on January 16 2013. I was reluctant to join to begin with and it was fun while it lasted. I care about my public image and my data and I’m willing to pay for a service which will not claim my work as theirs, without comment or credit. As I do, and will continue to. While I understand that in order to be a part of the social web today some sacrifices must be made, but this crosses the line. My images are not “throwaway”, each one tells a story. Part of my story. And I don’t give them away for free. Believe it or not, there are a lot more interesting and useful images than pictures of lattes, cats and sunsets for Facebook to make money from.

Here are just a few of my own favourite images taken with Instagram:

I think I aptly covered all relevant clichés.

Canoeist

Oh Autumn

Untitled — Sunset


Sale

Pizza and a pint on this beautiful sunny day :)

Untitled — Heart Graffiti

Hot Chocolate

Pylon

Birds

#nails

It’s a fucking glorious day. City Hall is full

Lovely afternoon spent with Grannymar

The Spire

Today I am proud to be from Belfast. Over 1,000 people gathered at the City Hall for an hour. Then at 11.55 whistles, horns and drums came out. Screams could be heard all around and the clapping was contagious. The atmosphere was electric. There was no tension in the air. Everyone was happy to be out. If anything, it made us simply feel better about the people who live here. As one placard said: “It’s a piece of land, and we all have to live on it.”

This was a non-political event. Organised on the ground by a very small number of individuals, which rapidly spread over the course of just a few days, this is the way in which our society will continue to move forward. This is about more than a flag, this is about informing the small, violent, minorities that we do not want violence. The very fact that many did not turn up today due to fears for their (and their childrens’) safety from a counter-protest, is a sad fact in itself. However, today was peaceful, and we can only hope that tomorrow will be peaceful.

The next step is ensuring that the positive attitude that everyone went away with can be shown in the party policies, that our government leaders can lead us away from violence. That the fight for peace can resonate in the minds of those who continue to disrupt the peace. Whatever the outcome, we came together and showed our support. For peace. For no violence.

I won’t apologise. I will constantly tweet about #BelfastPeaceRally. I don’t my kids growing up with the shit I did. Sunday 11am City Hall

— Karen O’Rawe (@classygenes) December 15, 2012

Very heartwarming to see all the photos and videos of todays #BelfastPeaceRally. Wish I could have been there!There in spirit from work lol

— Emma Lyttle (@EmJLyttle) December 16, 2012

Very proud of my friends and others who made a brave and dignified stand for progress – no trouble here #belfastpeacerally

— Laura Kelly (@laurakaykelly) December 16, 2012

In England and Wales the number of people selecting “no religion” increased from 15% in 2001 to 25% in 2011.

The NI data reveals 48% of the resident population are either Protestant or brought up Protestant, a drop of 5% from the 2001 census.

However, the numbers show that 45% of the resident population are either Catholic or brought up Catholic, yet only 41% Catholic on census day.

• 41% Catholic
• 19% Presbyterian
• 14% Church of Ireland
• 5.8% other Christian or Christian-related denominations
• 3% Methodist
• 0.8% other religions and philosophies

Putting this with the figures for national identity — the first time this question has been asked — the overall statistics become much more interesting as well bringing a better understanding of the politics of people in Northern Ireland. Just 25% regard themselves as Irish only. This just shows there is not a definable correlation between religion and national identity/voting pattern.

According to the BBC

7% say they either belong to another religion or none

And the UTV reported this as

Just over 5% of people in Northern Ireland said they do not belong to any religion

Each news outlet is taking different data to be the correct response.
The BBC are giving the number of 6.75% of those who “who did not state religion” for Question 17 which asked “What religion, religious denomination or body do you belong to?”. While UTV gave the number of those 5.59% of those who answered “none” to Question 18 which asked “What religion, religious denomination or body were you brought up in?”.

Neither of these take into consideration the 10.11% of people who answered “No Religion” under the same Question 17.

This inaccuracy of the data reporting is extremely important, and it’s a shame to see the media portray the numbers incorrectly. The numbers of those who have no religion are

Jill Farquhar states why this is important:

As politicians use the census statistics to form policy and allocate resources this type of misrepresentation is extremely significant. The use of data conflating religion with religious background produces an image of Northern Ireland which is significantly more religious and significantly less diverse than is actually the case. This reinforces the Catholic/Protestant binary and justifies the continued intrusion of religion into lawmaking in NI (see the restrictive abortion legislation for example).

More broadly, the conflation of ‘religion’ with ‘religious background’ perpetuates the idea that the religion of our parents defines our own religious identity and produces religion as something essential to the individual rather than something which can be changed, challenged and/or rejected.

For the purposes of the NI census, it seems, atheists really are ‘catholic atheists’ or ‘protestant atheists’.

Based on the data in English and Wales, the British Humanist Association (BHA) has calculated that if the change in Christianity shown between 2001 and 2011 continues, then Christians would be recorded as being in the minority from September 2018.

This is highly significant data as we watch rationality become the norm, yet there are still continued efforts to be done in education, particularly in Northern Ireland, which has seen a rise in Atheism and secularism, and indeed a growing progressive liberal community, however this has been much smaller than elsewhere in the UK.

Below is the data comparing the 2011 census data with that from 2001:

alone, it is routine,
a mindless necessity,
like using the bathroom, or
starting your car.

you lay there and try to get
comfortable, and drift off,
and eventually, wake up and
continue on with your life.

but with a lover, it is all
reversed.
daily life becomes this void,
this dully, disappointing filler
between the hours in which
you can lay together again,
curled up in
silent serenity.

you take a slow,
deep breath, and gaze
upon your lover’s eyelids,
trying to imagine everything
that could be happening
behind them,
until you part ways
and reunite in a dream.

- ao-oa