5 ms·

I was going to protest the full Lena image without a NSFW warning, but hadn't realised the full story of its history[1]... The site in general is a beautiful w

I was going to protest the full Lena image without a NSFW warning, but hadn't realised the full story of its history[1]... The site in general is a beautiful work of art, a great blend of attention to detail with comedy of computing in that era. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna - tl;dr is this iconic test picture for computer imaging was a cropped Playboy centerfold from 1972. I've just finished a PhD which included a fair bit of image processing, but I was unaware of the story behind this iconic image.

PostOnce 9y ago
You were going to protest it? And do you think anyone would care about your protest? Do you really expect everyone else to annotate the entire internet on your behalf? Despite the fact that this is a totally random, joke website that is almost certainly not work related? What about people in countries or workplaces where "unacceptable" is a far broader and more oppressive net than "contains nudity", or places where nudity is fine? For whom do we annotate the internet? Maybe you should just disable auto-load of images in your browser or install a nudity filter. This is insane.
- jaapz 9y ago
  You're overreacting to a very small and not very relevant part of their comment which probably just meant "making a comment about the NSFW nature of the image". Not "i'm going to make a sign and force everyone to stop using this website". Calling this insane is... insane
  - PostOnce 9y ago
    Who complains about stuff on someone else's website not being tagged NSFW? It's their website, they didn't name it workrelated.com -- I just thought "protest" sounded a little extreme and a sign of our sensitive new culture, where we each expect everyone else to tiptoe around us. Maybe I misinterpreted.
    - graeham 9y ago
      Protest here was more of 'make a comment on'... I think its a cool site. I was thinking of showing it to high school students I teach summer courses to, but its probably not appropriate for them. That's why labels are helpful - nude images weren't ok in schools or work in the 'old culture' either. As art or entertainment (as this website in general was intended), I think there is wide license to the creator, but I think there is still some duty to a website creator to consider what else people might want to use it for.
      - PostOnce 9y ago
        > I think there is still some duty to a website creator to consider what else people might want to use it for. Am I the only person baffled by this? Does the world now revolve around every passer-by? Why is the creator's duty to do anything other than satisfy his own artistic urge? Why does what someone else wants to do with his art matter? He kindly provides access, he isn't forcing anyone to view it. Where do you draw the line on what concessions he should make for someone else? What sort of absurd concessions might someone demand? What you want sounds like a cascade of chilling effects, self-censorship, and second-guessing. Also it's odd that you think a bare ass is not appropriate for for high school. How long do you imagine the psychological scarring from that might afflict them? At what age do you think it is appropriate to set foot in an art museum? Bizarre.
        tomcam 9y ago
        It was well explained, fuckhead. Right here: >I was thinking of showing it to high school students I teach summer courses to American school districts can get intense about this stuff. It's stupid, I know. But it's not the PP's fault--PP can be seriously messed with for something like the Lena image. Talk about psychological scarring, you turd-flingining monkey. You need to retreat back to 4chan or whatever slimy hole you crawled out of.
        PostOnce 9y ago
        "well explained" why it's the website owners job and not the teachers job to police content? he explained what he wants, not why it ought to work that way. Your post doesn't contain an argument, just a bunch of ranting; make an effort.

PostOnce 9y ago

You were going to protest it? And do you think anyone would care about your protest? Do you really expect everyone else to annotate the entire internet on your behalf? Despite the fact that this is a totally random, joke website that is almost certainly not work related? What about people in countries or workplaces where "unacceptable" is a far broader and more oppressive net than "contains nudity", or places where nudity is fine? For whom do we annotate the internet? Maybe you should just disable auto-load of images in your browser or install a nudity filter. This is insane.

jaapz 9y ago
You're overreacting to a very small and not very relevant part of their comment which probably just meant "making a comment about the NSFW nature of the image". Not "i'm going to make a sign and force everyone to stop using this website". Calling this insane is... insane
- PostOnce 9y ago
  Who complains about stuff on someone else's website not being tagged NSFW? It's their website, they didn't name it workrelated.com -- I just thought "protest" sounded a little extreme and a sign of our sensitive new culture, where we each expect everyone else to tiptoe around us. Maybe I misinterpreted.
  - graeham 9y ago
    Protest here was more of 'make a comment on'... I think its a cool site. I was thinking of showing it to high school students I teach summer courses to, but its probably not appropriate for them. That's why labels are helpful - nude images weren't ok in schools or work in the 'old culture' either. As art or entertainment (as this website in general was intended), I think there is wide license to the creator, but I think there is still some duty to a website creator to consider what else people might want to use it for.
    - PostOnce 9y ago
      > I think there is still some duty to a website creator to consider what else people might want to use it for. Am I the only person baffled by this? Does the world now revolve around every passer-by? Why is the creator's duty to do anything other than satisfy his own artistic urge? Why does what someone else wants to do with his art matter? He kindly provides access, he isn't forcing anyone to view it. Where do you draw the line on what concessions he should make for someone else? What sort of absurd concessions might someone demand? What you want sounds like a cascade of chilling effects, self-censorship, and second-guessing. Also it's odd that you think a bare ass is not appropriate for for high school. How long do you imagine the psychological scarring from that might afflict them? At what age do you think it is appropriate to set foot in an art museum? Bizarre.
      - tomcam 9y ago
        It was well explained, fuckhead. Right here: >I was thinking of showing it to high school students I teach summer courses to American school districts can get intense about this stuff. It's stupid, I know. But it's not the PP's fault--PP can be seriously messed with for something like the Lena image. Talk about psychological scarring, you turd-flingining monkey. You need to retreat back to 4chan or whatever slimy hole you crawled out of.
        PostOnce 9y ago
        "well explained" why it's the website owners job and not the teachers job to police content? he explained what he wants, not why it ought to work that way. Your post doesn't contain an argument, just a bunch of ranting; make an effort.