You could've commented literally anything else instead of this but instead went with a zero-content apparent criticism of the web page.
You could've commented literally anything else instead of this but instead went with a zero-content apparent criticism of the web page.
> zero-content
Changing the default demo is a reasonable and actionable suggestion.
But not why.
The topic of the demo is just ..odd: it's negative in its nature, difficult to understand (is there a message or a joke in there?), the animation isn't aesthetically pleasing either.
You just need to be older than 12 to understand what is problematic about the demo. Just pointing it out was sufficient.
Reproducing cringy sexist bullshit is a choice deserving of criticism.
No-one's mentioned that anything's sexist, or how. You're filling in the blanks to create content where there wasn't any.
That's how conversation works. Things can be implied when it's obvious.
And if it's not, the onus is on you to ask why.
> That's how conversation works. Things can be implied when it's obvious.
That's how groupthink works.
> And if it's not, the onus is on you to ask why.
I have asked why. Note the lack of answers, but the surfeit of pearl-clutching replies.
Where's your argument, Braveheart? Why play coy? If people don't like this choice, where's your defense for it?
The demo is not egregious by itself, it's the choice of the demo for this circumstance. Why boy-hits-boy-with-rock-for-girl for an animation DSL?
The behavior depicted is literally sexual competition.
The fact that EVERYBODY here sees it but you, tells you that perhaps you should take a step back and try to understand... it might be YOU who don't get it at all...
I think the poster gets it. As do I. And I do not believe either of us care all that much about the vocal minority.
Isn't that funny, considering you seem to be the vocal minority here?
Folks, we're now 5 levels deep on this thread and I still haven't heard it spelled out what's wrong.
I see "it's obvious" "cringey" and allcaps being used. Being able to vocalize specific problems and having the courage to clearly state it is a life skill.
Please be specific about the problem and why. Bonus points for replacement suggestions.
The boys-fight-for-girl is a very typical movie trope and this is a scene-based product. Maybe that's why they defaulted to it.
Well, here goes. The "story" told shows a woman as something men possess ("Backoff! She's mine!".) She even asks "do I get a say?" (hah, as if!) and is ignored, of course. If two men want to possess the same woman, they get into a physical fight, where the winner gets to own the woman. Oh, plot twist! She "decides" for the nice guy (lucky her, getting a man!)
Do you seriously think this is a story still worth telling? Is that how you view women? Is that how you view men?
But since you asked specifically about someone spelling it out letter by letter for you:
Women are not a prized possession, but individual humans, like men. You do not "take" them, you don't "fight over" them, you don't "own" or "win" or "loose" or "deserve" them - because they are not objects, but humans. They can also decide to pick neither of the two men if they so desire, and pursue a career in neuroscience.
Men who disagree over something do not, in fact, need to hit each other immediately, or throw rocks to their heads. They have the ability to talk and listen to reason. Because they aren't chimpanzees, but sapiens, a species with extraordinary capable brains.
Regurgitating this very trope, which works just as well with aforementioned chimpanzees instead of humans, proliferates the stereotypical depictions of women and men. Science is very clear about the fact that repeated exposure to an idea increases acceptance of this idea, so telling the tale of boys-fight-for-girl time and time again ensures its firmly planted in people's heads, influencing their view on other people negatively.
Women are exposed to severe violence all around the world, every day. If you don't believe this, I don't feel obligated to convince you with any particular slice from the mountain of freely available scientific material on the topic. Alternatively, for a fun little experiment, consider asking five female and five male relatives or friends each about the three worst things they can imagine happening to them on the way home at night. No spoilers, but the answers are going to be very different.
+1 This is a good if verbose response and the points and questions will be easy for the library author to address.
I'm going to take "you" here to mean the author instead of myself b/c I already found the example distasteful for reasons similar to yours.
> But since you asked specifically about someone spelling it out letter by letter for you:
You took time to do this and I appreciate it. I like to think you're teaching others how to respond clearer. I hope we can see this level of organized thought and direct challenge at the top level instead of reactionary slang and huffing.
I think you're discounting people's reaction of not liking it. That is communicative. Not everything has a well established model to communicate efficiently using words.
And being a trope is not enough of a defense; tropes can drift away from culture over time.
The demo is not egregious by itself, it's the choice of the demo for this circumstance. Why boy-hits-boy-with-rock-for-girl for an animation DSL?
If the choice is meaningless, why defend it?
And if the choice is meaningful, why this?
> If the choice is meaningless, why defend it?
> And if the choice is meaningful, why this?
Well said. So many of these painful "discussions" could be ended quickly if people would just honestly answer these :)
Its the plague of western people thinking they have the moral high ground over other cultures and nations. In the place where I grew up this kind of scene would be considered normal. But you must be the one who dictates what is right and what is wrong, don't you?
Please do tell me which culture finds it acceptable to throw rocks at people because they happen to like the same woman.
Even ignoring the unnecessary language, sexist content, gender stereotyping, and so on and so forth, just the warrantless violent act in that story is enough for people to object to. And enough people have objected that there isn’t any good reason for the author to keep that animation included. Particularly when it doesn’t actually demonstrate this library in a way that literally any of demo couldn’t. So why even defend it?
> moral high ground over other cultures and nations.
I don't think I have that, really. But I have the high ground over people who objectify groups of other people, and if that is really central to your culture, then I am not accepting of it. Make of that what you will; you do not seem particularly open to criticism either.
Why are you passionately defending this? I doubt the author cares much, it's clearly an example that came about through vibe coding.
It's not core to the tech/product, people think it's off-putting, why not change it?
Hacker News loves to talk about being amazing business-people and "understanding the customer" but somehow that gets dropped for things like this.
The fact that people in the tech-world don't realize that they are embodying deeply ingrained sexist / toxic behavior is the reason why women aren't more present, and why people like Musk or other sociopaths have been celebrated by this community, while the rest of the world hate them...
Yes. It’s astonishing how I see individuals with these enormous egos centered on their intellectual, technical achievements, who have such egregious blindspots surrounding their own unethical attitudes and behavior.
Sirs, please turn the apparatus upon itself. Question yourself as a part of a larger system. What is your function among members of your own species? How can you falsify your hypotheses on this subject? Please don’t be so incurious.