[HN Gopher] Why aren't you more serious?
___________________________________________________________________
Why aren't you more serious?
Author : luu
Score : 35 points
Date : 2020-09-20 20:30 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (rubenerd.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (rubenerd.com)
| quicklime wrote:
| If you're browsing the site on a mobile phone like I was, you
| probably won't see the image of the mascot on the right-hand-
| side. Even if you click the "mascot" link, you'll just go to a
| text description of it.
|
| The image is here: https://rubenerd.com/rubi@1x.jpg
| nowandlater wrote:
| Serious question: Is Shatner being serious here?
| https://youtu.be/lul-Y8vSr0I?t=20
| dctoedt wrote:
| A gawdawful hairpiece ....
| el_don_almighty wrote:
| I'm 53 and still laugh at fart jokes, let the dog lick my face,
| and wear shirts with collars as "office camouflage" only when
| necessary. I am way ahead of you on the timeline and will let you
| know when it's time to grow up.
|
| Media publishing is about having a target market and not worrying
| about the segments you don't hit. Late night comedians don't
| worry about not having Rush Limbaugh listeners in their
| demographic and vice versa.
|
| As you rightly say, your blog posts are part therapy and part
| knowledge transfer. That doesn't mean the "technical publishing"
| meta-tag doesn't also reasonably apply and brings a segment of
| readers with certain expectations.
|
| I really appreciate that you opened the curtain a bit on their
| concerns and your disdain for them.
|
| They aren't your customers and never will be
|
| Saddle up the unicorn and keep riding
| microcolonel wrote:
| > _Late night comedians don 't worry about not having Rush
| Limbaugh listeners in their demographic and vice versa._
|
| I mean, the lefty late-nights may not be hitting that market
| right now, but that doesn't mean that a competent one couldn't
| hit it without compromising the model.
| some_furry wrote:
| > They claim that my writing is too jovial, my site mascot drawn
| by Clara is inappropriate,
|
| I get a lot of similar feedback for using art of my fursona in my
| blog posts (i.e. for the purpose of added emotional inflection).
|
| The feedback was sufficient enough to warrant a dedicated
| response post: https://soatok.blog/2020/07/09/a-word-on-anti-
| furry-sentimen...
|
| Personally, I find the rubenerd site mascot to be tasteful. The
| shades of green and blue complement each other well, and the
| skirt's length isn't risque enough to raise my eyebrows. (But
| then again, I'm not exactly a _prude_.)
| throw_24537147 wrote:
| Just in case you haven't figured it out yet by all the
| downvotes you're receiving: you're not welcome here. HN is
| hacker news, not _degenerate_ news. HN isn 't the space for you
| to try to normalize your weird fetish, it's for people to talk
| about technology and things of intellectual interest.
|
| If you want to be taken seriously, delete your blog and start
| over without any of the furry crap. Otherwise, you're just
| going to be downvoted, flagged, and your submissions ignored.
| And before you get all heated at me for telling you this: You
| might think I'm being mean to you for telling you the truth,
| but try to understand that I'm being kind. I'm giving you the
| cheat codes to a happier life. You're clearly a smart guy. I
| don't particularly care that you're gay or like furry porn. But
| even if you pulled off a long series of technical
| accomplishments that revolutionized cryptography, _neither I
| nor my team will read your blog_. And, having said this, we
| will do whatever we can to stop others from reading it, until
| you 've learned your lesson.
|
| (Throwaway for obvious reasons.)
| nkingsy wrote:
| So many comments. Just wanted to say, never seen furry stuff
| before and found the art on the linked page quite pleasant. I'm
| flabbergasted that this is some kind of issue for anyone.
| Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I for one found my
| furiousity piqued by the imagery.
| jbob2000 wrote:
| Put yourself in the shoes of someone who wants to send these
| articles to their manager to support an idea/project of theirs.
| It absolutely detracts from the professionalism of the post.
|
| Any joe-schmo can string together smart sounding words. You
| need to signal to me that I need to take these words seriously,
| and when you mix in your otherworldly passions, I can't take
| them seriously, it's too unfamiliar to me.
|
| Aside from that, what it is about the anime and furry culture
| that pushes its participants to include it in _everything_?
| Every once in a while, I see a post on the cringe subreddit of
| some young man who has peppered anime and fursonas all
| throughout a school presentation. What is driving the need to
| include this in everything?
| some_furry wrote:
| > Put yourself in the shoes of someone who wants to send
| these articles to their manager to support an idea/project of
| theirs. It absolutely detracts from the professionalism of
| the post.
|
| I, as a hobbyist who blogs about things in my spare time for
| my own amusement, owe no obligation to random people's
| managers.
|
| In 99.9999% of cases, that also includes _my own manager_ at
| my place of work. (And even then, my _only_ obligation is to
| not talk about things that aren 't meant to be discussed
| publicly.)
|
| > Every once in a while, I see a post on the cringe subreddit
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePnrEolRopU
|
| > What is driving the need to include this in everything?
|
| I've answered this on my about page.
|
| https://soatok.blog/about/
| throw_24537147 wrote:
| You seem really self-centered and immature in this comment.
|
| Sure, you owe no obligation to other people... so why
| bother giving to charity or helping strangers out of bad
| situations?
|
| If we take your position to its logical conclusion, we end
| up in a very nihilistic and sociopathic society. Is that
| what you really want to advocate for? I sincerely doubt any
| furries could survive for very long in such a world.
| filoleg wrote:
| >What is driving the need to include this in everything?
|
| This is just an armchair psychology theory, but I feel like
| it is just the need for social validation in the absence of
| it, as well as an attempt to prove that their
| interests/passions that are considered to be for "weird" or
| childish people can belong to "normal" adult people too.
| Hence why they never forget to remind people at any point in
| a regular discussion about that interest, as if it is a
| regular everyday thing that a lot of people are into.
|
| And in the meantime, it is also sort of an interest/passion
| that isn't about an activity (very unlike most other
| interests/passions), but rather about being a different
| entity as a person, which makes it more difficult to detach
| yourself from that interest, as it literally is solely about
| being another form of yourself.
|
| Overall, I agree with your sentiment however. Having furry
| content in a technical blog post would essentially prevent me
| from sharing it with my teammates, no matter how good the
| actual technical content of that post is.
| some_furry wrote:
| > Having furry content in a technical blog post would
| essentially prevent me from sharing it with my teammates,
| no matter how good the actual technical content of that
| post is.
|
| I don't disbelieve you, but I do have a question!
|
| Why?
|
| Why is furry/anime/whatever inherently disqualifying,
| regardless of the quality of the technical content?
|
| (n.b. None of the art is adult-oriented, if that's what
| you're worried about. I made an editorial decision on day
| one to keep the artwork featured on my blog 100% worksafe,
| even if the discussions aren't always.)
|
| Is it a fear that "Nobody will take me seriously"? This
| didn't stop the EFF.
| https://twitter.com/EFF/status/1307037184780832769
| filoleg wrote:
| > Why is furry/anime/whatever inherently disqualifying,
| regardless of the quality of the technical content?
|
| It isn't inherently disqualifying, unless it is plastered
| everywhere where it doesn't belong, like in the middle of
| a lot of unrelated conversations or in the middle of a
| professional technical blog post.
|
| For example, if you just have a furry image in your
| website header, but the content of your technical post
| itself is on-point and doesn't have a bunch of unrelated
| furry stuff, most people will have no issues sharing your
| content and recommending it to others.
|
| For a good example of that, take a look at the website of
| the guy who did a lot of impressive work and research and
| became famous for the YOLO image classifier[0]. His
| website features my little pony characters. He is very
| openly into it. His MLP-themed resume made as a halfway
| joke is extremely infamous on the internet. And then take
| a look at his technical blog posts. He writes really well
| and doesn't let his interests detract him from quality
| writing. And no one who is interested in reading about
| the technical topics he covers seems to have any issues
| with the content of his posts at all.
|
| 0. https://pjreddie.com/
| stonogo wrote:
| I wouldn't share a link with my colleagues that contained
| _any_ cartoon emoting at all, because they would find it
| (and by association me) infantile and cloying, and I
| would expect that assessment, _in a professional
| setting_. The species or art style is not, for me, the
| heart of the issue; it 's just that people in my line of
| work are generally not receptive to this method of
| communication. This same sector of the world would also
| not respond well to, say, shorts and t-shirts in the
| office, for almost exactly the same reasons. There is no
| way in hell I will ever be able to change this, but I
| would be able to effectively destroy my own credibility
| by posting links to cartoon-annotated technical articles.
|
| My online sphere of interactions includes both furries
| and otherkin and we generally get along fine. I don't
| like that this sort of boundary matters, but it does, and
| I'm not in a position to do anything about it.
| jbob2000 wrote:
| It's disqualifying because, in the case of furries, it
| started as a sexual fantasy. Much of the furry community
| sees fursonas as a sexual choice.
|
| If you included pictures of scantily clad people in all
| of your posts, I would also hesitate to send it to my
| manager.
|
| Anime has a huge sexual following as well. There's an
| entire industry around printing anime girls onto body
| pillows for these fans to sleep with, for example.
| some_furry wrote:
| > It's disqualifying because, in the case of furries, it
| started as a sexual fantasy.
|
| I don't know where you heard that, but it's incorrect.
|
| There's a documentary that delves into the history of the
| furry fandom: https://youtu.be/c2N1sFWRRf8
|
| > Much of the furry community sees fursonas as a sexual
| choice.
|
| No, this is a myth that a lot of people outside our
| community believe.
|
| If you have a fursona, that's supposed to be a
| representation of _you_. Fursonas are about identity. It
| _can_ also be about one 's queerness (which is probably
| fair to say in general, considering 80% of the fandom is
| LGBTQIA+), but being queer doesn't mean "being sexual".
|
| https://furscience.com/research-findings/sex-
| relationships-p...
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2016/feb/04/furry-
| fandom...
|
| (Yes, there _is_ a side to most fandoms that focused on
| adult entertainment, but that 's not all of it.)
| filoleg wrote:
| >> It's disqualifying because, in the case of furries, it
| started as a sexual fantasy.
|
| >I don't know where you heard that, but it's incorrect.
|
| Maybe that's technically incorrect, but you should check
| out how the early coverage of furry culture was
| presenting it as[0]. Here is an interesting excerpt:
|
| "Early portrayal of the furries in magazines such as
| Wired, Loaded, Vanity Fair, and the syndicated sex column
| "Savage Love" focused mainly on the sexual aspect of
| furry fandom."
|
| 0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom#Public_perce
| ption...
| jbob2000 wrote:
| I think your documentary is biased, as it's been made and
| hosted by a furry themselves.
|
| On the Wikipedia page about furry fandom, it says:
|
| > The furry fandom has its roots in the underground comix
| movement of the 1970s, a genre of comic books that
| depicts explicit content.[5] In 1976, a pair of
| cartoonists created the amateur press association Vootie,
| which was dedicated to animal-focused art. Many of its
| featured works contained adult themes, such as "Omaha"
| the Cat Dancer, which contained explicit sex.
|
| As well, it even has a section dedicated to sexuality,
| where it states:
|
| > In a different online survey, 33% of furry respondents
| answered that they have a "significant sexual interest in
| furry", another 46% stated they have a "minor sexual
| interest in furry", and the remaining 21% stated they
| have a "non-sexual interest in furry".
|
| Although you may not engage with it sexually, it very
| much has a sexual following.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom
| some_furry wrote:
| > I think your documentary is biased, as it's been made
| and hosted by a furry themselves.
|
| What do you consider an unbiased news source?
|
| CNN? https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/14/us/furries-
| culture/index.html
|
| Vice? https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjmq9d/how-the-
| furry-comm... https://video.vice.com/en_us/video/gothic-
| cocktails-with-ton...
|
| Psychology Today?
| https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-
| us/20170...
|
| Almost every expert who has seriously studied the furry
| community has come to the same consensus: The public
| imagination is wrong, often hilariously so.
| jbob2000 wrote:
| I read your articles, thanks for sharing. A community of
| people can loudly declare whatever they want, it's their
| actions that determine who they are.
|
| Go and look at some surveys from furries, like the ones
| listed in the Wikipedia article. Although they say it's
| not about sex, they respond differently in private.
| indrora wrote:
| The amount of... failure to understand what you're
| talking about is on the level of white people trying to
| explain native american cultures after watching half of
| Pocahontas while half asleep.
|
| Furries started as a sexual fantasy like The Colbert
| Report started as a serious news show. It didn't. The
| Colbert Report was intended to satirize news outlets like
| Fox, but art imitates life and you gotta talk about the
| real world at one point or another. Furries started as
| panels and room parties at science fiction cons and guess
| what, humans do this thing where art imitates life and is
| a reflection of of humanity at large.
|
| But, you seem to have made it a goal to intentionally not
| understand what you're talking about and argue in bad
| faith, looking for validation of your limited worldview.
|
| To counter your point: My boss actively suggests to
| people a wide mix of books on subjects, including [The
| Manga Guide to
| Cryptography](https://nostarch.com/mangacrypto) and
| within my company it's not uncommon to see people making
| MLP references, references to anime and manga (including
| BNA, Aggretsuko, Hello Kitty, etc) and more.
|
| If you can't read an article for the contents & think
| critically about its construction and presentation, did
| you even go to college? Or did you fake your way through
| that degree? Or were you just not challenged through high
| school to think and that's where your 4.2 perfect GPA
| came from?
| throw_24537147 wrote:
| From the Site Guidelines:
|
| > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing,
| shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It
| degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're
| worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll
| look at the data.
|
| You may mean well with your comment, but the last
| paragraph is clearly not in spirit of the HN site
| guidelines.
| munificent wrote:
| _> Put yourself in the shoes of someone who wants to send
| these articles to their manager to support an idea /project
| of theirs._
|
| That is, frankly, your problem and not the author's. The
| author has already taken the time to distill their knowledge
| into text, put it online, and allowed you free access to it.
|
| _> It absolutely detracts from the professionalism of the
| post._
|
| From the author's perspective that may be a feature not a
| bug. Maybe they don't _want_ to come across as professional.
| It 's their writing and their little corner of the Internet.
| They can create as they please.
|
| _> You need to signal to me that I need to take these words
| seriously_
|
| No, they need do no such thing. If _you_ want to extract
| value from what they 've already taken the time to create and
| share, it's up to you to figure out how.
|
| You're a grown-up. If you can't figure out whether text is
| enriching and useful to you or not without it being presented
| with just the right imagery, color, and font, that's on you.
|
| _> and when you mix in your otherworldly passions, I can't
| take them seriously, it's too unfamiliar to me._
|
| This is a good sentence. Here you are correctly articulating
| that it is _you_ who is having trouble assimilating the
| content they 've shared. That's your choice. They have the
| freedom to put it out there and you have the freedom to
| ignore it if it's not to your taste. Everyone can do what
| they choose and everyone wins, for their own personal
| definition of "win".
|
| _> Aside from that, what it is about the anime and furry
| culture that pushes its participants to include it in
| everything? Every once in a while, I see a post on the cringe
| subreddit of some young man who has peppered anime and
| fursonas all throughout a school presentation. What is
| driving the need to include this in everything?_
|
| It's an important part of their identity and one that has
| fairly broad negative connotations. They rationally want to
| normalize it so that they can be their best fully-actualized
| self without having to deal with shame or criticism like your
| comment here.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-09-21 23:00 UTC)