this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
31 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1427 readers
98 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid!

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post, there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

That guy defending the book in the comments by going 'he is 19, I also thought the same when I was 19 and only realized later that he was intended to be the bad guy'. Oof... (And double oof as his comments goes from 'I didn't get this message at 19, and now 15 years later, I get why others dislike the book, without really making it 100% clear that he himself also considers Humbert the bad guy. (In the few times I had the misfortune of talking to pedophiles, this is the type of squirrelly language they use. Not that this means the person is a pedophile, I assume he isn't and just expresses himself poorly there, he just gives off a dodgy feeling with that one comment. Anyway, think the devil has enough lawyers).

Edit: I would esp be wary of playing devils advocate for somebody who writes this in their design document:

Afterword 1

There are three kinds of beauty:

[ first kinds excluded ]

Beauty by perversion. In "The 120 Days of Sodom", the main characters liked to play weddings where the male groom was dressed up like a female bride, while the female bride was dressed up like a male groom.

That is a very odd example to pick from that book. Certainly considering everything the past few decades.

(I have no opinion on the language itself, didn't even look at it as I don't really think creating new languages is that interesting. I'm always reminded of the XKCD competing standards comic).