claudiawerner

I don't really understand Pomodoro. When I'm at work, I'm constantly confronted by things not working (the dev environment) and using tools others wrote in an ad-hoc way. Any focus time is almost half spent diagnosing issues with the software. I don't do any deep work, because I spend my time writing tests (thanks boss!) and then getting those tests to work. It just feels so unfulfilling, that I don't want to sit there for three minutes to wait for the tests to compile doing nothing, I'd rather at least browse HN.

I don't know why any particular person would do it, but I don't drink to sleep.

I'm a heavy drinker and what I've read about alcohol and sleep says that it's bad for your sleep, in particular the quality of REM sleep. Anecdotally I can back that up with my own experience, as I drink before I go to sleep.

However, it's much easier to fall asleep after you've been drinking, but that's just because alcohol is a nerve depressant anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_use_and_sleep

Not really, no. People can wear short skirts without being sexualized; it's a fashion preference like any other.

Even so, I dispute the idea that sexuality or moe doesn't belong in the products of our labor. And moreso, I dispute the idea that school uniform fetishes sexualize children in the case of an adult wearing one.

I don't see it as sexualized or fetishized at all. It's rather charming to see anime mascots these days rather than some soulless logo.

It's strange to assume that anime is for people who aren't middle agged men :)

As someone living in the UK I've never really felt the desire to make a 'company', but I would like to run a website some day, which permits user registrations. Something like a forum, which I wouldn't run for profit. The fact that I need to implement external age verification, so some other for-profit business knows who my users are is such a sad prospect that I just won't bother with a website.

Additionally, I'd be reluctant to hand over my personal data just so I can be in a few Discord rooms.

>You cannot be harmed by them unless you choose to allow yourself to feel that way. Your internal mental state is under your control.

This is incorrect, and flies in the face of the current literature in psychology and neuroscience. A cursory glance at some very rational people who are quick to anger and how we cry after losing a loved one should rid you of this notion.

"Most terrible things at least some people love. That doesn't mean they're not terrible."

4chan, as a website, is far more varied than you think at first glance. Most people only hear about 4chan when "something happens", and with the news cycle, that's pretty much always bad things. For example, an anonymous 4chan post solved a 25-year-old math problem[0]. It's unfair to paint a whole popular website by the activities of some of its users on one or two of its discussion boards.

There are some boards dedicated to sharing anime porn. Others, discussing technology. There's one for discussing favorite toys, one for wrestling, and another for the Hasbro show My Little Pony.

[0] https://www.wired.com/story/how-an-anonymous-4chan-post-help...

>When mankind made a pact with the devil, the burden we got was that we had to earn our bread though sweat and hard labor. This story has survived millennia, there is something to it.

This sounds mystical and mysterious; it would be a mistake to project one mode of production as being the brand all humans must live with until we go extinct.

It could be my own bias, but I don't see HN as a particularly progressive place, at least as compared to, say, Reddit. Granted, it can be a good or a bad thing, but HN has a far wider spectrum of opinions that get upvoted; IME trans issues in particular dominate comment threads when it comes to LGBT issues.

>This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want to be another gender.

Did you really think this was going to be downvoted on Hacker News of all places?

Thanks for the last three links; it's interesting to see data analysis like that, even if I disagree on some of the presentation and the claim in the first link that even women readers dislike the presentation of women characters in books. Straight romance books saturated with tropes, in many cases far more explicitly than even porn, are massively popular among adult women.

My point is that if you comment "A female character written by a man" as an inherent mark against something, that's still a fallacy no matter what statistics say. If you had comments about Monkey Island in particular, then it would have been best to just say that, rather than directly say that no man could ever write a good woman character.

A subreddit full of literally cherrypicked examples of men badly writing women characters doesn't say anything about the general case, never mind any particular case.

Why does it matter what gender the creator is?

I accidentally installed this on Gentoo once when I was looking for a decent CJK font. Little did I know, somehow it was set system-wide as the default CJK font, and I couldn't reverse it. I lived for about a year at my PC seeing all CJK text in this font, which got a little grating after a couple of months.

>the streamer is most likely an adult man, not a cute asian girl

I can't see why that makes it "kinda gross"; in fact, playing with identity and having the courage to do so in a whimsical way seems awesome. To have the security in oneself to put on a persona so different to the one we are in meatspace is one of the best inventiont of the 'net in my opinion. The possibilities are freeing.

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

>And the persona is being performed for the benefit of other adult men.

What possible 'benefit' do they get out of it? Do we know if these "other adult men" leer at the persona? And if so, so what? So long as the person behind the persona isn't be harrassed. It's strange that this sentence is implicitly stating that something done for the benefit of adult men is wrong in itself.

My comment was only in reference to the photoshoot set containing the document or the 'BDSM bear'; my point is that these alone feed into an outrage machine that goes nowhere.

As for Volkova, I don't know enough to judge, but you might be right, I don't know; but it's a separate issue, in which there may be more under the cover than the usual insinuation and conspiracy thinking.

>One of them seems to show, albeit in an obscured way, text from a Supreme Court decision related to the PROTECT Act, a 2003 federal law that states child pornography is not protected by free speech.

This is not the whole truth; it's an excerpt from Ashcroft vs Free Speech Coalition, which was a case in which it was decided that fictional depictions of minors that don't exist nude or engaged in sexual acts is protected speech under 1A. If anything, its placement seems even tongue-in-cheek; many other countries do not have as thorough free speech protections, and such material is outright illegal.

The "Twitter users" mentioned in the article likley refers to Sh0eonhead who has a history of stirring up controversy around child sexualization with very little evidence, only insinuation and conspiracy style thinking. She's figured out that the one thing that unites the political spectrum is the mere hint of child sexualization and it's being milked for all it is. We saw similar last year, with the 'Cuties' debacle, which was also based on mere insinuation and conspiracy.

Truly a nothingburger story, like most stories based off a few tweets.

And Pleroma too, which somehow missed your list despite being the second most popular AP server...

Oh, I didn't know that. Looks like I was completely wrong about GNU APL. Thanks for the links.

APL looks like a lot of fun, and I've tried to get into learning it for a while, but it's a shame that the most popular implementation is proprietary, and GNU APL is a dialect which is not as featureful and a separate dialect of APL unto itself, so it's not as though you can write a reasonably sized APL program with Dyalog and then expect it to work in GNU APL.

It's worth looking at why people who are already on Twitter don't want to use Mastodon/Fediverse. The last time this topic came up on Twitter with Musk's first proposal to buy Twitter, several concerns were raised (and well-liked by thousands of other users) in several threads I noticed:

* Migrating one's account and tweets to Mastodon

* Finding people on Mastodon

* General confusion about what federation is, or what it means

* Stories of people who once used a Mastodon belonging to a friend group, had a falling out with whoever happened to be running the server, and was kicked off/had their account deleted

* The fact that DMs aren't private, and can be read by an instance admin, or by the instance admin of the instance of the user you send them to. This particularly seemed to unnerve people because you're more likely to interact and know who the instance admin is than you are with Twitter support/SWEs.

* The difficulty of choosing an instance.

* The difficulty of avoiding certain people and certain content, usually spoken of in terms of principle: that is, abusive messages and content which admins must agree to filter, but some admins may not want to block that content, leaving the users on an instance known for harboring that kind of content

* On the flip side, rampant defederation and the formation of cliques which become increasingly isolated social bubbles.

* The name of the software and its default interface

* The names of various instances which range from the whimsical to the offensive (e.g. 'wolfgirl.engineering' to 'fuckonthefirst.date').

* GDPR concerns and personal data privacy concerns - how do I delete media and text that I've uploaded that's now been shared across multiple instances? How do instance owners cope with this under the law?

I've seen very, very few responses to any of these problems; some of them I object to myself, but it seems short-sighted to say that the only reason people aren't jumping ship is because of network effects and not genuine concerns with the technology and the community as it exists today.

I noticed that too! I wonder what's happening there. I searched the CSS and there's nothing like green in there... Anyone have clues as to what's causing the text within textboxes and such to be green?

That's a good point, and I agree - I only wanted to pick up on the point about 'cartoons'. As for whether realistic generated images with real human data sources would have a good effect, it certainly wouldn't have a good effect on preventing further child abuse, and again, as far as I know there's no evidence that it would 'placate' them in the sense of the (widely debunked) catharsis theory.

And of course, I'm not looking forward to the world ushered in by free roam with this technology, mainly for the reasons you stated.

>This area is already well explored just with fake CSAM generated by artists using photoshop, cartoons, etc.

I'm familiar with the research in this area, and that's not something you can say confidently; most work (and by that I mean 2 or 3 papers in total) has gone into investigating the role 'generated' depictions of CSAM play in the collections of hoarders. No psychological study, as far as I'm aware, has conducted an investigation on those who enjoy cartoon material akin to what you might find in a Japanese manga.

In fact, there's some evidence against what you're saying; anthropological research on fans of cartoon material ('lolicons' or 'shotacons') in Japan shows that their communities draw hard lines between '2D' and '3D' not just in this area of sexuality, but in their sexualities as a whole. This sexual inclination toward the 2D world is termed the 2D-complex and is akin to 'digital sexuality' or fictophilia, not pedophilia.

By way of analogy, perhaps BDSM would work as a good counter point to you. Many people (some studies suggest the majority of people) engage in 'rape fantasies' or other such fantasies of illegal or immoral nature, yet although actual depiction of rape is rightly banned by the state, its simulated variants are not, and we are comfortable to acknowledge that sexual desires do not always manifest in real life, and sometimes the thrill of fantasy itself is the attraction. To make it real would, ironically, defeat the whole point.

You may be interested in this review of their arguments and the context for their style of debate, which was far more interesting after watching the video: https://www.salon.com/2014/05/13/%E2%80%9Ci_was_hurt%E2%80%9...

I've read some debates held between MPs in Hansard. I can't speak for any sizable portion, but what I did see on the topics I was interested in is a shockingly low form of discussion abound with fallacies, name-calling, and soliciting the opinions of unqualified individuals to inform the law.

Sure, they may run circles around you or me when it comes to debating some aspects of policy. But not around someone who's invested time and energy into a specific topic, which I think ought to be the bar for whether we consider these people 'well educated' and 'intelligent' when they are running the country supposedly on my behalf(!).

While true, Nintendo in particular is known to be particularly bad with this topic unfortunately, to the point of demanding that people who host Lets Plays on Youtube to take their videos down.

If the phone company knowingly carried a clique of users matching the description of KF, I don't think it significantly changes the argument.