True, but guthub.ca is (or now was) available. @plg, do you mind if I steal the idea? Actually love the idea of open source recipes with pull requests, branches, etc. and I’ve been looking for an idea for my next side project…
A number of years ago I had a great boss who was trying to target hire someone so he made a ridiculous job req asking for expertise in “git’s, gat’s, gots.” It was a defense job
fancy doing this when they could have simply forced the fat-fingered user into an endless cycle of http redirects, popup adverts, crypto-mining banner ads and finally a "this domain is for sale" parking page..
(Didn't think to mark it until people commented, and technically there's no nudity, but if you are looking at it and someone passes your desk they'll THINK there is nudity, and if you are actually at work I think that passes the bar.)
I'm curious why you jumped to "women" here, when they aren't relevant to the conversation. Do you think women need to be protected from unsafe imagery at work, or "nsfw" is designed to protect women?
GP isn’t necessarily assuming bad faith. Suggesting that women are any more or less likely to be offended by something is Considered Harmful because it enforces gender binaries and stereotypes.
Most people don’t have malicious intent. The biggest reason that the tech industry is so infamously misogynistic is because people don’t actually know much about the issues of gender, and don’t really know what is misogyny.
Let me make this a little clearer and more to the point: suggesting that a company of 80% women would appreciate a mild dick joke in the context of whether or not the joke is safe for work is enforcing a gender binary that both separates women from men (by suggesting that there’s different senses of humor between them) and erases non-binary people. If you can think about it this way I’m pretty sure you can see why it’s also misogynistic even if you’re being “positive” towards women, as well as problematic in general, without GP needing any malicious intent whatsoever. And it could be avoided just as easily by being educated and aware.
This isn’t some sort of “snowflake” shit, either. We just live in a society that perpetuates these harmful gender stereotypes even during water cooler chit-chat, and the only way to change it is to point it out.
Please also assume good faith.
Edit: I don’t like the tone that I wrote this comment in, and so I want to make myself clear that I’m not trying to attack anybody either. My point is really that comments can be harmful without being written with malicious intent, and pointing it out when possible is important if anybody wants to see that aspect of society change.
> Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them....
Ah yes, the classic "You're sexist for pointing out sexism" argument.
> An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny".
An interpretation which has nothing to do with the comments at hand, which is determining if some content is SFW or not.
> As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith.
Yes, that means assume good faith when there is uncertainty. I don't see much uncertainty in the post in question, they are fairly explicit about their point.
NSFW had become an euphemism for p-o-r-n(w/exposed parts) and in that sense it’s not NSFW because. In literal sense it is. And that discrepancy is somewhat confusing.
It's just that gif of David Hasselhoff in a speedo where it keeps zooming in on his crotch and it's just more David Hasselhoffs in speedos forever. An image that I assume anyone who's even heard of the Internet has already seen a hundred times. I wouldn't call it NSFW, personally.
[EDIT] I mean, contextually, if you're being weird about it or posting that kind of thing all the time, yeah, it could become NSFW. But I don't think sharing this particular thing maybe with a "warning: low-quality gif of Hasselhoff in speedo" in case anyone cares, is over the line.
It really depends on the degree to which your co-workers and clients lack a sense of humor.
For example, in the early 00's I was working for a company that built a lot of CMS sites. One of the test images my co-worker used was Yoda driving a go-kart. A customer got offended, so we were instructed to use really boring images that just had the word "test" on them.
Since their story happened 20 years ago its probably not related, but Reddit banned r/LegoYoda because of the captions on some photos of Yoda driving a 2003 Honda Civic.
This one I can kind of understand. Moreso than the Yoda one.
There’s a good chance at least one piece of copy will be missed when replacing the placeholder text, and for a vegan company, that can easily cause outrage for their customers since it’s just full of meat products. There are a lot of reasons for people being vegan and some hold incredibly strong beliefs on meat products.
To be clear, it wasn't a vegan company or even anything related to food -- it was a shipping company. There just happened to be someone who worked there who was an outspoken vegan.
this is not about different values but about oppression.
if a colleague were to share this image at work, i would tell them to stop wasting my time with this dumb stuff. if it was a member of a team i am leading i would tell them to stop goofing around and get back to work.
if on the other hand, someone would denounce this person for sharing inappropriate images, i would consider that an act of oppression. we are supposed to work together, and not against each other.
a work culture where every little transgression has severe consequences is not healthy.
if this image makes someone uncomfortable, they are welcome to talk to me and i will listen to learn why. i suspect most likely, it's not the image itself that's the problem, but the attitude of those who laugh at it. i will then talk to those people and do my best to get them to improve their attitude about such matters.
there are things that are inappropriate to do at work, and one of them is to make dumb jokes like this, but that doesn't make the image itself not safe for work.
and as for choosing my workplace, i come from a country where employees actually have rights. and one of those rights is to share their personal opinions, even if others disagree, as long as doing so is not disruptive. the idea that the leaders in the company can tell their employees what they are allowed to talk about or not is rather alien to me.
this doesn't mean that it's ok to say or share things that are hurtful. it only means that there is no topic that is a priori not allowed to be discussed at the work place.
if this image comes up because someone in my team actually did mistype their url, they may share it with the team, and if they have the appropriate attitude, they will dismiss it, denounce the maker of that website as juvenile and move on. if someone walks by, having no idea why this image is there on the screen, they may inquire about it, or come to me and ask me what that is supposed to be about. we'll check, find out and move on.
calling this image not safe for work, creates an environment of fear, that itself is not healthy and in the country where i come from, not acceptable.
I usually take "NSFW" to mean, Thing you might be embarrassed for other people whom you may not know well to see you looking at without context, not necessarily that it's going to result in severe consequences or trauma. I'm sure there are companies where an image like this would warrant an overreaction, and I agree with you on the absurdity of that, but I think the less hyperbolic meaning above is more common.
that's a fair point. i just take issue with diluting the meaning of a term by using it for things that are just mildly inappropriate vs things that are actually harmful or hurtful. it all just contributes to an environment of fear. i prefer that these terms be reserved for things that actually warrant a strong reaction.
The person I'm replying to said "If you think this is NSFW, then I don't think you should be spending any time on the internet. The internet is not safe for you."
If for work your machine has installed Hubstaff or any of these hyper-invasive things that micromanagers love, then you can have the bad luck that a bad taste spicy pic get screenshot and shown in your user activity. But nobody ever should by any reason ever use these zero-privacy apps, right?
> The most dangerous thing for the frontpage is stuff that's too easy to upvote. If someone proves a new theorem, it takes some work by the reader to decide whether or not to upvote it. An amusing cartoon takes less. A rant with a rallying cry as the title takes zero, because people vote it up without even reading it.
Paul Graham, What I've Learned from Hacker News[1]
Worth noting... he says this to contrast his surprise at how well the system works in the paragraph immediately prior:
> I once thought I'd have to weight votes to keep crap off the frontpage, but I haven't had to yet. I wouldn't have predicted the frontpage would hold up so well, and I'm not sure why it has. Perhaps only the more thoughtful users care enough to submit and upvote links, so the marginal cost of one random new user approaches zero. Or perhaps the frontpage protects itself, by advertising what type of submission is expected.
A copy of the GH home page but every image replaced with Strong Sad... now that's got potential. Or any number of other better uses of the domain name.
I'm normally in favour of lighthearted stuff (to a degree), but in this case I agree with you. It seems a bit too low effort to warrant the high number of upvotes...
What's weird to me is that this seems like a totally implausible accidental misspelling, which just shows how differently people type, I guess.
I can see that 'i' and 'u' are adjacent on the keyboard, but if you touch-type, they belong to different fingers, and I can't see how I'd transpose them while getting all the other letters right. If my right hand were shifted over by a key, I might get 'gutguv' or 'gotjim', I guess.
I think the misspelling is more likely for someone who’s not super capable with English and doesn’t have familiarity with Git. Even for people who usually operate in (natural) languages that use the Latin alphabet (or something close to it, like the Greek or Cyrillic alphabets), without recognizing the cue word “hub,” “guthib.com” is as meaningful and memorable as “github.com.”
It happens more often than one might think. I know I've typed "guthib" at least a few times in the last decade or so that I've been using github, and coincidentally I just caught myself mistyping "decade" as "dedace". I pressed all the right keys, but in the wrong order.
I guess that packets from the brain sometimes suffer from a kind of race condition as they arrive at the fingers.
Maybe it's related to fact that we're surprisingly good at reading words with teh lettres shffuled aorund. Perhaps my brain is trying to type a word at a time, instead of individual letters, so the packets go out in parallel. Perhaps the last point has something to do with the fact that my native language is Korean, where a word is written as a compact two-dimensional arrangement of symbols rather than a simple sequence of symbols. I dunno, it just happens a lot.
Doesn't seem that implausible given that we can read words just by reading the first letter and last letter, even if the letters in the middle are in the wrong order. We take words as lump-sum abstract objects instead of focusing on each of the letter.
I'm sure dsylexia gets the best of many capable people when banging out URLs.
I suspect that there's also a rather large overlap in the Venn Diagram of "people who use Github regularly" and "people who are sufficiently mentally toasted as to regularly make implausible errors".
I used almost never to make any sort of error whatsoever when typing, that I didn't immediately catch and fix.
IDK if it's age-related decline (I'm not even quite 40 yet...) or what but now I make all those homophone and bizarre-letter-substitution errors that I never, ever used to, constantly. I have to re-read everything I type or I'll have a stupid error like that every few hundred words.
To my understanding, letter transpositions are common even for great touch typists. Especially letters in the same "category" (such as shifting vowels around in this instance). Sure, it's a different "feel" when typing it wrong and if you are paying attention you might catch it, but you generally when touch typing don't think about the specific feel of individual letters, but the pattern or "shape" of the overall word. "gut" is a common enough word pattern (and an English word in its own right). "hib" is not, but if your brain/muscle memory is expecting the full "word" "github" and knows it uses both fingers "in the middle of the shapes" and it already used "u" it can be a likely transposition to wind up with "hib".
On point. Though if someone struggles with repeating themselves, I can recommend oh-my-zsh git aliases. They replace common git commands with shorter equivalents, like git push -> gp, git pull -> gl, etc
136 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 199 ms ] threadOf course it’s actually already a real thing: http://www.gathub.com/?p=28
Qualities: punctual, effective communicator, attention to detail
...yet my W's web filter still blocks it.
> This is not the [distributed version control system hub](https://github.com/) that you're looking for.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110107153429/http://guthib.com...
(Didn't think to mark it until people commented, and technically there's no nudity, but if you are looking at it and someone passes your desk they'll THINK there is nudity, and if you are actually at work I think that passes the bar.)
EDIT: It is not NSFW. If you think this is NSFW, then I don't think you should be spending any time on the internet. The internet is not safe for you.
EDIT: Actually, just checked. They did find it hilarious.
I'm curious why you jumped to "women" here, when they aren't relevant to the conversation. Do you think women need to be protected from unsafe imagery at work, or "nsfw" is designed to protect women?
An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny".
As the HN comment guidelines suggest:
> Assume good faith.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Most people don’t have malicious intent. The biggest reason that the tech industry is so infamously misogynistic is because people don’t actually know much about the issues of gender, and don’t really know what is misogyny.
Let me make this a little clearer and more to the point: suggesting that a company of 80% women would appreciate a mild dick joke in the context of whether or not the joke is safe for work is enforcing a gender binary that both separates women from men (by suggesting that there’s different senses of humor between them) and erases non-binary people. If you can think about it this way I’m pretty sure you can see why it’s also misogynistic even if you’re being “positive” towards women, as well as problematic in general, without GP needing any malicious intent whatsoever. And it could be avoided just as easily by being educated and aware.
This isn’t some sort of “snowflake” shit, either. We just live in a society that perpetuates these harmful gender stereotypes even during water cooler chit-chat, and the only way to change it is to point it out.
Please also assume good faith.
Edit: I don’t like the tone that I wrote this comment in, and so I want to make myself clear that I’m not trying to attack anybody either. My point is really that comments can be harmful without being written with malicious intent, and pointing it out when possible is important if anybody wants to see that aspect of society change.
Ah yes, the classic "You're sexist for pointing out sexism" argument.
> An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny".
An interpretation which has nothing to do with the comments at hand, which is determining if some content is SFW or not.
> As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith.
Yes, that means assume good faith when there is uncertainty. I don't see much uncertainty in the post in question, they are fairly explicit about their point.
Kant or Heidegger probably wrote something similar.
[EDIT] I mean, contextually, if you're being weird about it or posting that kind of thing all the time, yeah, it could become NSFW. But I don't think sharing this particular thing maybe with a "warning: low-quality gif of Hasselhoff in speedo" in case anyone cares, is over the line.
For example, in the early 00's I was working for a company that built a lot of CMS sites. One of the test images my co-worker used was Yoda driving a go-kart. A customer got offended, so we were instructed to use really boring images that just had the word "test" on them.
https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy
A client being offended at something like that is a bit of a red flag for me...
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5...
https://baconipsum.com/?paras=5&type=all-meat&start-with-lor...
There’s a good chance at least one piece of copy will be missed when replacing the placeholder text, and for a vegan company, that can easily cause outrage for their customers since it’s just full of meat products. There are a lot of reasons for people being vegan and some hold incredibly strong beliefs on meat products.
Boss made me use boring stock photos instead :(
You aren't badass for "being cool" with this imagery.
if a colleague were to share this image at work, i would tell them to stop wasting my time with this dumb stuff. if it was a member of a team i am leading i would tell them to stop goofing around and get back to work.
if on the other hand, someone would denounce this person for sharing inappropriate images, i would consider that an act of oppression. we are supposed to work together, and not against each other.
a work culture where every little transgression has severe consequences is not healthy.
if this image makes someone uncomfortable, they are welcome to talk to me and i will listen to learn why. i suspect most likely, it's not the image itself that's the problem, but the attitude of those who laugh at it. i will then talk to those people and do my best to get them to improve their attitude about such matters.
there are things that are inappropriate to do at work, and one of them is to make dumb jokes like this, but that doesn't make the image itself not safe for work.
and as for choosing my workplace, i come from a country where employees actually have rights. and one of those rights is to share their personal opinions, even if others disagree, as long as doing so is not disruptive. the idea that the leaders in the company can tell their employees what they are allowed to talk about or not is rather alien to me.
this doesn't mean that it's ok to say or share things that are hurtful. it only means that there is no topic that is a priori not allowed to be discussed at the work place.
if this image comes up because someone in my team actually did mistype their url, they may share it with the team, and if they have the appropriate attitude, they will dismiss it, denounce the maker of that website as juvenile and move on. if someone walks by, having no idea why this image is there on the screen, they may inquire about it, or come to me and ask me what that is supposed to be about. we'll check, find out and move on.
calling this image not safe for work, creates an environment of fear, that itself is not healthy and in the country where i come from, not acceptable.
The person I'm replying to said "If you think this is NSFW, then I don't think you should be spending any time on the internet. The internet is not safe for you."
It was pretty gross. Not quite as bad as goat.se.
Paul Graham, What I've Learned from Hacker News[1]
[1]: http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html
> I once thought I'd have to weight votes to keep crap off the frontpage, but I haven't had to yet. I wouldn't have predicted the frontpage would hold up so well, and I'm not sure why it has. Perhaps only the more thoughtful users care enough to submit and upvote links, so the marginal cost of one random new user approaches zero. Or perhaps the frontpage protects itself, by advertising what type of submission is expected.
Hearkens back to that feeling of all of us being internet citizens and laughing that I'm not the only one that makes this mistake.
Maybe I'm looking into it too much, though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A copy of the GH home page but every image replaced with Strong Sad... now that's got potential. Or any number of other better uses of the domain name.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-serving_site
[0] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sites/single-serving-site
I can see that 'i' and 'u' are adjacent on the keyboard, but if you touch-type, they belong to different fingers, and I can't see how I'd transpose them while getting all the other letters right. If my right hand were shifted over by a key, I might get 'gutguv' or 'gotjim', I guess.
Yeah, I remember seeing this website as "a typo of github", but wasn't able to rediscover it.
Not all touch-typers use or ever even learned the formal touch-type method.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak_keyboard_layout
I guess that packets from the brain sometimes suffer from a kind of race condition as they arrive at the fingers.
Maybe it's related to fact that we're surprisingly good at reading words with teh lettres shffuled aorund. Perhaps my brain is trying to type a word at a time, instead of individual letters, so the packets go out in parallel. Perhaps the last point has something to do with the fact that my native language is Korean, where a word is written as a compact two-dimensional arrangement of symbols rather than a simple sequence of symbols. I dunno, it just happens a lot.
I suspect that there's also a rather large overlap in the Venn Diagram of "people who use Github regularly" and "people who are sufficiently mentally toasted as to regularly make implausible errors".
IDK if it's age-related decline (I'm not even quite 40 yet...) or what but now I make all those homophone and bizarre-letter-substitution errors that I never, ever used to, constantly. I have to re-read everything I type or I'll have a stupid error like that every few hundred words.
No million tracking/analytics lines.
I respect that.
http://www.blankwebsite.com/
https://www.blank.org/
https://isoaklandburning.com/
http://isitraininginportland.com/
It’s not so clear-cut: https://github.com/GutHib
Apparently I spelled this one right. Or close enough.. xD