Photos of Mosul 2017 - <AUTHOR> https://petapixel.com/2017/07/05/no-one-buy-photos-free-mosul-2017/ <comment><USER2> The recent drone footage from Mosul is some of the most mind blowing, surreal stuff imaginable. God help anyone trapped in that city.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW_F2ntQOcQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW_F2ntQOcQ)

<comment><USER3> anti refugee sentiment is so unconscionable, what the hell world do we live in

<comment><USER4> Please at least make an attempt to try to understand the other side. When any immigrants come, they change the country they immigrate to. With these particular refugees, they're refugees in no small part because of shortcomings their home culture has. It's not evil to want to preserve your own culture in the face of this. You can feel empathy for the people trapped in a hellish warzone just as you can feel empathy for the girl raped by migrants. The refugee debate is not good-vs-evil; it's competing virtues.

<comment><USER5> You can simultaneously preserve your own culture and let people have a place to live.

Bringing up incidents of rape in the abstract like that is unwarranted and inappropriate in the context of the point you're trying to make.

Think about how you'd feel if you were in the situation of migrants/refugees.

<comment><USER4> You can't perfectly preserve your culture when you let in immigrants on the scale that, say, Germany is. It's sort of a sliding scale; the more you let in, the more you change. Europe will be changed for this.

As you should be able to tell from my earlier comment, I do empathize with the migrants. It's a shitty situation, and were I in one of these war-torn country, my top priority would be getting my family out of there. But the laws and immigration policies of Western countries are crafted by the current citizens and should be moulded to their benefit, not a universal altruistic ideal. By my interpretation, that would be limiting immigration to a number that can be reasonably integrated to the host culture. Immigration to Europe currently far exceeds this.

I'm sorry if my mentioning rape offends, but I don't think we can have an encompassing discussion of migrants without at least mentioning it. I could have also mentioned migrants' attitudes towards women, LBGTs, freedom of speech, or freedom of religion. These are not views I want any sizable number of people in my democracy holding.

<comment><USER6> Defending you here:

I too feel strongly for the refugees.

I'll be happy to pay more tax if it helps solve the problem.

However I see Merkels let-them-come attitude as dangerous feel-good politics.

Why?

1\. Because moving that many people around creates dangerous (for us and them) conflicts.

2\. Because for every refugee we help in Europe we let down 100 in the middle east. Why? Because it costs enourmously much more to help people here than to help them down there.

So - IMO - today's feel-good let-them-come policy should be replaced with a targeted approach aimed at helping them where they are or in neighbouring countries.

As I said I'll be happy to pay more a little more tax for this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> These shots capture the harshness of human conflict and how we (human beings) change in the face of it. Thank you.

I disagree with people saying these are good shots. In the collection another user posted ( [http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul](http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul) ) there are better shots technically and artistically. Yet that the photographer chose these shots for the article speak tons. These aren't photographs to make you feel better, these are photographs to make you understand (even a tiny bit) what real war looks like and it is ugly.

<comment><USER8> I always found disturbing the way a mixing "art" with this kind of subject. It's giving a much more positive feedback, as in "it looks cool" or the feeling of emotions you get in a movie (because it doesn't look real).

Let's not forget war is freaking horrible and there is nothing worth idealizing one way or another about it. That's my personal belief, but I don't think art has its place here. Any form of heroic spectacle are truly misleading about what the people and soldiers truly endure.

<comment><USER9> Does there exist any acceptable mixing of art + war in your view? What are your thoughts on Picasso's "Guernica" [1] ?

[1] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(Picasso)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_\(Picasso\))

<comment><USER10> When I think about Guernica I think about opportunism.

The painting was commissioned before Guernica's air raid. After the bombing Picasso remade the paint. This is the true history.

[https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Felpais.com%2Fdiario%2F1983%2F03%2F05%2Fopinion%2F415666809_850215.html&edit- text=)

[https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Flaverdadofende.blog%2F2014%2F04%2F26%2Fel- guernica-de-picasso-nada-tiene-que-ver-con-el-bombardeo-de-guernica%2F&edit- text=)

<comment><USER9> fascinating. yet must the history of a painting always overshadow its current emotional impact & message?

<comment><USER10> Years ago I learned to separate the art from the artist. There is too much art that I love made by despicable people, like Picasso. He was a really awful person but I leave that aside when enjoying his work.

Another interesting article about Picasso.

[http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/05/arts/art-review- occupied-p...](http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/05/arts/art-review-occupied- paris-and-the-politics-of-picasso.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "But the soldiers had fed me and given me a seat in their Humvees, and the refugees had tolerated my presence on some of the worst days of their lives. They very rightly expected that I would tell their story."

You could have explained a little about the death of newspapers and other media outlets, and how much existing footage/photography there is of conflict in Iraq (to say nothing of Afghanistan, Syria etc). They should have been under no illusions as to the likelihood of any particular photographer getting their work paid for and published. It's like the Simpsons joke about space missions. The first guy landed on the moon and it's the story of the century. The 12th lunar mission though? Meh - what else is on. Trying to get a western, especially an American, audience excited about another batch of photographs about fighting in the Middle East seems like something of a tall order. Even outside of the news photography has died a death. Anyone can take an adequate photograph nowadays with cheap, simple equipment so few people are willing to pay a professional.

<comment><USER12> "death of newspapers and other media outlets" decreases supply of such images - armchair bloggers have less means, infrastructure and connections to do it.

<comment><USER13> The proliferation of mobile devices that record videos and pictures has IMO made up for it with sheer documentation volume from people on the spot. The Syrian civil war is far more thoroughly documented than the first Gulf War even though the first Gulf War took place in an environment where Western news-gathering organizations were in a much better financial state. You can see combat recorded from the the Syrian Arab Army, the foreign military powers intervening in the war, and the rebel factions. Not just combatants, either; the aftermath of attacks on civilians gets recorded/uploaded as well. They're all uploading stuff for the world to watch.

The vast majority of this footage is admittedly uploaded in service of one agenda or another, but that's just a lateral move from the status quo ante of the 1991/2003 Iraq invasions. The critical Western press coverage of war in the Vietnam era did not seem to endure. (And that was itself a bit unusual; American press coverage of WW II and Korea was by-and-large aligned with the aims of the American government in those wars.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> These are great pictures, and makes me realize that while we hear a lot (though not enough) about these conflicts around the world, its usually just accompanied by a photo or two or a few seconds of video capturing a firefight or an explosion. But such things are cliche at this point and don't hit home. Seeing real soldiers taking a break between firefights, and real families fleeing their homes with their children and a few belongings really makes the reality of the situation much more graspable. I think we need to see a lot more of these candid photos (and video too) of the real people whose lives are being devastated by these conflicts.

<comment><USER15> There is a great short film about the yugoslav war that depicts this really well. You can find it on youtube, type in "10 Minutes, a short film".

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'd never heard of the Free Burma Rangers before, and these photos helped me learn. I guess that means the author has succeeded in his admirable mission to tell others' stories.

<comment><USER17> I too had never heard of the Rangers and their work. Here's their site: [http://www.freeburmarangers.org/](http://www.freeburmarangers.org/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> A consistently excellent place to view photos of this sort, though not exclusively about war, etc, is the Atlantic "In Focus" page:

[https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/](https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/)

I visit them once a week and go through the photos. Quite amazing.

</comment><comment><USER19> I would love to donate to this person, and I couldn't find a way. Any suggestions?

<comment><USER20> From the last line of the article:

> If you'd like to support my work, you can purchase prints of my photos. You > can also learn about and support the world of the Free Burma Rangers here.

[http://www.kainoalittle.com/prints/](http://www.kainoalittle.com/prints/)

<comment><USER21> While I strongly support this journalist's work, I'm extremely hesitant to support the Free Burma Rangers. In Iraq they are an armed religious group, and while their goal of supporting refugees is admirable, their methods seem likely to make things worse.

To be clear, their methods involve actively seeking out firefights. See [http://www.freeburmarangers.org/international/kurdistan/](http://www.freeburmarangers.org/international/kurdistan/) for some idea of how they think about this.

<comment><USER16> They are armed and they are religious, but they don't seem to be acting as combatants. The article you cite doesn't indicate that FBR members participated in any fighting. Yes, they actively seek out firefights because - rather obviously - that's where their services are likely to be needed. There are arguments for and against being armed in such an environment, but none of that suggests they're an "armed religious group" in the same sense as ISIS or the Badr Brigades. Perhaps you could explain why you think their methods are likely to make things worse, more than is true for any foreign group up to and including Red Cross/Crescent or MSF.

<comment><USER22> Not being armed in such an environment is insane. I spent most of a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, and unless I was on US bases with vastly better security, was armed in any situation where it was possible (there were a couple exceptions in Afghanistan and they were horrendously stupid.)

(Not religious, and not a "security contractor" \-- we ran wifi and satellites and such -- but zero interest in being kidnapped and beheaded in a crappy video like one of my high school classmates. Never had anything bigger than a .30cal, and generally low profile vs big armored trucks, but also never got kidnapped.)

Given the lack of US QRF in the conflict areas of Iraq today, the case for every humanitarian or commercial entity being armed is even stronger now.

Some form of neutral, armed-for-self-defense entities for both commercial and NGO services would make a lot more sense than relying on foreign governments. While I love a lot of what MSF does, they have been criminally negligent in securing their personnel in places like Afghanistan.

<comment><USER23> Aside from the political/ethical discussion here: logistically, how did you arm yourself when abroad as a private citizen in the Middle East?

I'm guessing you get blessing from Iraqi and/or American embassies in advance? How do you ship arms without falling afoul of carrier and export issues? Or are there arms corporations that allow for pickup on location (or on US bases)?

<comment><USER22> In Iraq in 2003-2004 it was "send one of my guards to the market to see what was on offer". I spent the entire time I was there trying to get a Sig or Glock; had a Browning Hi Power pretty early on, then upgraded to a CZ 97B once I found a way to get .45acp ammo. Also spent the entire time trying to get a decent AKM, never found one, ended up with an RPK. I saw some MP5s as well, but they were $3-5k, and 9mm isn't really a great round in FMJ, so I never got one. Obviously everything remained in country when I left.

I was locally contracted with DOD/etc and had letters from my customers authorizing me to be armed. (There was policy that such authorization had to come from the combatant commander, but in reality it got delegated pretty far down, and even if people in my customer orgs were not individually authorized to sign, no random MP would challenge those orgs.) It was a pretty ambiguous situation, but being American, I was essentially exempt from local law, and private citizens (Iraqis) were allowed one rifle for self defense in any case. There were some US bases where I wasn't allowed to carry, but the commanders were able to authorize that as well. The absolute worst thing that could happen from the US side would be "sent back to the US", but there was really no risk of that, and the most routine thing was at worst "please deposit your weapons with our office until you leave our base, if you don't have weapons authorization" on the biggest bases toward the end of the occupation -- and those are the places where I would have just secured it anyway in an armory because I didn't want to carry it around, and in any serious incident I would have been around professionals or could have picked up M4s off the ground.

Most private contractors were prohibited by their US issued contracts and their insurers from being armed, unless they were security companies. Many outside the wire contractors still armed themselves the same way I did.

The international shipping of arms is really the only problem; within a country like Iraq it really isn't a big deal. I did end up learning to do armorer level maintenance on the AK and Hi Power platforms while there, and made friends with a gunsmith.

<comment><USER23> Fascinating stuff, thank you for sharing.

I'm glad you were able to make it out okay. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Good shots Kainoa, I really wish I could read the story that goes with them.

I can see it being hard as a news photographer of any sort these days, as papers are going through a very hard transition that may see them completely vanish at the other side of it.

Have you considered finding some writers on Medium? Their new concept is to be the platform without the paper, readers select writers more organically and writers get paid more directly, photographers don't fit directly into this model yet but you could at least sell to writers there. Maybe medium will come up with a way to have multiple contributors to articles that photographers could be a part of too.

<comment><USER24> To clarify with the Medium thing, I guess what I mean is when you sell to papers you don't consider it your job to find the writers that your photos go with, but maybe now that is part of the job.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Some really good photos. War is tragic, but it sure allows for people to capture amazing photography. What does this say about us?

</comment><comment><USER26> For photos by a pro check these out: www.asmaawaguih.com/albums/liberating- mosul/

</comment><comment><USER27> It's weird because I've read several times over that violence in the world is decreasing on average, so it would seem the middle is the last violent place. Still quite violent...

<comment><USER28> you see all those weird straight lines when you look at the political boundaries on a map of the middle east? those are lines drawn by former colonial masters. they look inorganic because they aren't natural.

this alone is a seed of conflict: unnatural borders that don't reflect a social reality. throw in prized resources to compete over, and it's incredibly fertile ground for violence.

now, look where else you can see these national border geometries for a glimpse into the future...

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> There seems to be a few more photos in the collection on his site too:

[http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul](http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul)

</comment><comment><USER29> Curious why the photographers pictures didn't sell? Is there an oversupply of stuff material? Is the source questionable?

</comment><comment><USER30> Why would no one buy these amazing photographs? Either OP is bad at finding a buyer or photography is one tough job.

<comment><USER31> There are things that are not supposed to be shown on the traditional media, dead soldiers being the first one that comes to mind.

Maybe these pictures go against the prevailing vision the media wants to disseminate.

<comment><USER32> Tell that to the BBC, ITV, and Sky News here in the UK. They show dead bodies all the time. I find it distasteful. I get it - people died, you don't have to show me their bodies to get your point across.

<comment><AUTHOR> > I find it distasteful. I get it - people died, you don't have to show me > their bodies to get your point across.

For many people seeing photos sends across very different emotions than reading words.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I suppose you mostly tried US papers? I see a better audience for this in Europe

<comment><AUTHOR> Apologies for the confusion, this isn't by me -- I was merely sharing the page and wasn't sure what else to title it than what it had originally. I just posted a note to that effect.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Note: Just to clarify in case anyone misinterprets, these are not _my_ photos! I merely copied the title from the page. If there's a better way to title pages like these, please let me know, since I was confused as to what title I should put while avoiding it being misleading.

<comment><USER34> It'd probably work to prefix the name of the author before the title, so something like "Kainoa Little: No One Would Buy My Photos, So Here They Are For Free: Mosul 2017".

<comment><AUTHOR> Ooh, that's a good idea, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I hope this thread doesn't get hijacked with political discussions. I'll spare my comments at least. Let the story be told through the images...

<comment><USER36> What else should we talk about in this thread? About how sad it is that nobody wanted to buy her photos, or about how great it is that she's giving them away?

<comment><USER37> To be honest, sounds like a plan, because I'd like to know the former and I agree with the latter.

<comment><USER38> It's just my personal opinion, but I think these photos are poor quality. Many of them were not in focus and post-processing was used to make them look better. And that's based on the really small versions available. So I don't think it's surprising they were not accepted by some newspapers (especially that we don't know the asking price).

Still, it's great that the author decided to share them for free. They have great value even without being top quality - it's just that many publications want to keep the photos quality top notch.

<comment><USER39> Excuse the photographer for the fuzziness of a photo taken while BULLETS ARE FLYING AROUND.

<comment><USER40> getting the shot correctly while BULLETS ARE FLYING AROUND is _the job._ Blurry photos don't get printed, and they certainly don't win Pulitzers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Wildly off topic: this site redirected my mobile chrome to some advertisement with a screen blocking scammy alert and closed all other tabs. What the hell?

<comment><USER42> I think you have some malware on your device; closing all other tabs isn't something a website should be able to do.

<comment><USER41> The device rebooted like 10 minutes later so I'm breaking the tinfoil hat out. Anyone got good advice on how to handle possible infection on an android phone?

<comment><USER43> Factory reset

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> His website won't load. No wonder they're not sold.

<comment><USER45> The article has received both the Reddit and HN hugs of death, it might be a traffic problem. And it loads fine (quickly, even) for me...

Try the author's Instagram: [https://www.instagram.com/isawgold/](https://www.instagram.com/isawgold/) or personal website: [http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul](http://www.kainoalittle.com/mosul) if the Petapixel link is not loading for you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Very nice, but could have used higher resolution.

</comment><comment><USER47> They're decent pictures, but not "GREAT" pictures. Even in warzones photojournalism is a highly competitive field. Editors at Reuters, AP and other news agencies get tons of sets offered every day.

Whining about it in an extremely passive aggressive blog post really isn't going to help his career along.

<comment><USER48> I'm sorry, but where is the whining? He simply said that no-one would buy his work, and that he felt he owed it to the people who kindly shared some of their lives with him to try and get their story out there. The headline 'no one would buy my photos...' is catchy, truthful, and has obviously been effective at drawing attention.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> As a foolish man that had not experienced war.these pictures remind me of Call of Duty a lot!!???.I am kind of wonder the magics advance VR can do in training of soldiers?</comment>


What Is a Roman Coloring Book? - <AUTHOR> I found this project on github/bgolaszewski/UnGrindMyGears  but I don't know what a Roman book is? Can anyone answer what that is? <comment><USER2> looks like open sourced version of this

[https://www.amazon.com/grind-Gears-After-Coloring- adults/dp/...](https://www.amazon.com/grind-Gears-After-Coloring- adults/dp/172913517X/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?keywords=Roman+Coloring+Book%2C+Golaszewski&qid=1568026589&s=books&sr=1-1-fkmr0)

from Amazon description:

From simple to more complex, 12 designs of Mandala-like creations. The purpose is to relax, de stress and help with clearing the mind by focusing on the repetition of adding colors to patterns. There is a blank page added after each design in case markers or gel pens are used to color it in

looks like hes open sourcing based on fact it did not do too well on Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER3> Coloring this book would be fun but someone needs to suggest what colors to use. To a backend engineer like me, the only colors that exist are black and white (Terminal colors) :(</comment>


Feds may let Playpen child porn suspect go to keep concealing their source code - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/01/feds-may-let-playpen-child-porn-suspect-go-to-keep-concealing-their-source-code/ <comment><USER2> Essentially this means they're willing to let all 135 defendants walk rather than reveal the source code. (IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that when one of them goes free because of this, it sets a precedent that all defendants can use.)

This seems really fishy. The only way it makes sense is if the FBI is doing something massively illegal in that source code, and I can't even fathom what that would be. Perhaps there is no source code, and they're using NSA tools or other illegal wiretapping methods instead.

<comment><USER3> They can still prosecute anyone they caught by independent means. It's just a matter of having some other way to search their computers, which is just a formality in most prosecutions. It's exceedingly easy to get a warrant against anyone these days; that's why they have parallel construction.

<comment><USER4> The problem appears to be that they didn't doso, and they took over the site for ~2w before shutting it down, so they no longer _could_ doso if they wanted to.

I'm entertained that they're going to such lengths essentially to conceal their 0days. Did they assume the judges were just going to let them skirt by without verifying how they identified people? You'd think they'd have learned from the days of IDing piracy by IP address that it's generally not going to fly any more.

<comment><USER3> Giving up cases only if a competent public defender wants proof of guilt, including technology used, is a longstanding practice. [0] Then you underfund the PDs and live content that criminals rich enough to have a lawyer will often go free.

It's a beautiful justice system.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_tracker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_tracker)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If there were any DA with integrity they'd drag the agents involved in this to a grand jury to get the evidence and code, then indict them put them on trial as the criminals they are.

But it won't happen because no DA would ever go prosecute anyone from the FBI unless the orders came from some politically powerful source. Too much risk to their career and of backlash.

<comment><USER6> You could also argue that if the DA had ethics they would let the FBI catch these disgusting child porn criminals. It really goes both ways. And while the FBI might be criminals, who would you rather see behind jail? The people who track adults without warrants or the ones who track naked children?

<comment><USER7> >The people who track adults without warrants

This is much worse in my opinion. Doing it to catch "disgusting child porn criminals" shows they know it is wrong, but they think they can get away with it because "the ends justify the means". First they came for the child porn criminals, etc.

<comment><USER8> I don't think you understand how awful these crimes are or how many lives they destroy.

Victimized children don't really ever recover.

<comment><USER9> The victimization of children is not the crime they're going after here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So the options are:

1\. Reveal code which will explain the exploit. This would take down the existing ring, but also allow other child-pornographers to patch their systems (probably the politically worst thing possible). It may also reveal publicly controversial investigative methods of the FBI.

2\. Keep code private and potentially see the existing perps walk. This would preserve the exploit (maybe) for use another day, but might also be a risk to civil liberties.

What a mess.

<comment><USER11> You've missed:

3\. Be forced to admit in court that there is no source code and the defendants were identified by the NSA illegally spying, storing and analysing the internet traffic of all US citizens. The NSA hands the IP addresses to the FBI and the FBI fabricate the idea of "source code" as parallel construction in order to hide the NSA's activities.

<comment><USER12> or 4 (perhaps the most benevolent possibility): They'd rather use the fear of the unknown as a bigger deterrent against further pursuit of CP than getting a handful of convictions. People who are involved now or thinking about it may stop or never get involved at all if there's > 0% probability that the feds are holding on to a working 'sploit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> So were they actually caught with anything incriminating, or is the only thing identifying them the IP address that the FBI seemingly obtained through now classified means?

Is the TL;DR: They were caught with child porn, but that evidence is inadmissible because the warrant that let the FBI find it relied upon this "NIT", and the FBI won't reveal the NIT?

</comment><comment><USER14> A related talk really worth watching: [https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8136-stopping_law_enforcement_ha...](https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8136-stopping_law_enforcement_hacking#video&t=1518)

Makes the very solid argument the government hacks are like oilspills.</comment>