Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 579 posts

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#371

Post by WesternWind »

Jach wrote: post #325
Animats wrote: post #155

Naomi Wu seems to upset a lot of people. She makes things, and was accused by the publisher of "Make" magazine of being a fake, with some guy doing the actual work. She replied by posting long, detailed videos of her making stuff. An hour of cutting aluminum extrusions with a chop saw and putting together a frame. Soldering PC boards. Eventually, the guy apologized. One of the useful things she's done is to put up lo…

A user (I'll leave them unstated) deleted a reply with a metaphor along the lines of "what do you expect if someone wears a clown suit when speaking at a technical conference?" Well, here's her speaking at a tech conference, in "context-appropriate" attire that is neither skimpy nor a clown suit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt1OLgGIqhc In "She wears skimpy outfits sometimes", sometimes is really the operative wor…

If you have the skills, it generally shouldn't matter what clothes you wear.

Even if you don't have the skills, it generally shouldn't matter what clothes you wear.

Like don't strap knives to your arms, and do wear a good mask, but generally we spend a lot of time policing other folk's bodies and attire, and for what?

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#372

Post by parsimo2010 »

Naomi definitely knows what she has. Her handle is SexyCyborg after all. But that doesn't mean that she should be demonetized. There are two main issues that are worth discussing around this-

1. Discussing where YouTube should draw the line on modesty. They don't allow full on pornography and most people think that's okay. I personally think that an attractive person making tech videos is probably okay. Maybe not everyone likes it, but there are a ton of videos on YouTube that I don't like and are still monetized. Even if I disagree with where exactly we draw the line, I think it's okay that YouTube sets a modesty standard. There will obviously be disagreement across cultures about the right set of standards to apply.

2. Criticizing YouTube's inconsistency in applying these rules. There are numerous examples of videos with women wearing skimpy outfits that are monetized and there are numerous examples of videos with women's busts in them that are monetized. It doesn't matter what the reason is for Naomi's demonetization- whatever the reason it's inconsistent and that is unfair. I think this is clearly the worse of the two issues here. If YouTube is going to claim some set of morals to appeal to advertisers, they need to be consistent. It would even be preferable (to what they are doing now) if their reaction was to give a strike strike or demonetize every creator that is pointed out where they had videos of women's busts. Just the appearance of aiming for consistency is better than what they are doing now.

YouTube found something special in creating a community of people that identified as YouTubers (above any other media platform they were on) and YouTube's recent actions are going to result in them losing that magic. Naomi's case is just one example. Maybe the magic is already gone.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#373

Post by blueflow »

pdkl95 wrote: post #361
chii wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because other people stir shit up with her as the topic, either for fun/trolling, or they truly feel she's somehow threatening (their masculinity and world-view).

While some people certainly seem to subscribe to "feeling their masculinity/world-view is threatened" interpretation, the fundamental problem that q lot of people don't seem to understand is that the internet changed the mechanics of fame . The best explanation I've seen - and possibly the most important video on youtube - is "This Is Phil Fish"[1] by Innuendo Studios. It's not really about Phil Fish; it's about ever…

No post body was provided.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#374

Post by kragen »

3np wrote: post #352
kragen wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you can install youtube-dl (or yt-dlp) in termux, or if not maybe use NewPipe.

I do, just usually save it for when I'm on a proper computer. (Piped is my fav altfront for YT so far BTW)

Ooh, thanks for the rec.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#375

Post by Mikeb85 »

M4v3R wrote: post #297
aloisdg wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USA. that's why.

Except it's not an USA thing. Here in Europe showing nipples in a public place is also considered nudity and generally frowned upon. It's a cultural thing, no need to attribute ideology to it. And the culture is shifting - just a century ago it was considered not modest if you wore shorts or short skirts, or two-piece swimsuits, now it's normal and accepted.

> Here in Europe

Where are you? UK? Poland?

Everywhere I've been in Europe breasts != nudity.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#376

Post by fenomas »

stavros wrote: post #315
Animats wrote: post #155

Naomi Wu seems to upset a lot of people. She makes things, and was accused by the publisher of "Make" magazine of being a fake, with some guy doing the actual work. She replied by posting long, detailed videos of her making stuff. An hour of cutting aluminum extrusions with a chop saw and putting together a frame. Soldering PC boards. Eventually, the guy apologized. One of the useful things she's done is to put up lo…

> She makes things, and was accused by the publisher of "Make" magazine of being a fake, with some guy doing the actual work. That's fucked up. Why would someone accuse anyone of being a fake, just because they didn't look a certain way? Detestable.

Years ago there was a comment here on HN, to the tune of: "when a man fronts a team he's called a leader or a CEO; when a woman does the same she often gets called a figurehead or a fake", and it's one of those things where once I heard it described I started noticing it a lot.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#377

Post by penjelly »

never heard of her. Just checked her channel and every episode is her in a tube top and short shorts. Maybe she's technical, but the way shes dressed is clearly with the intent to draw people in sexually.

When she leaves the house she puts on a full set of clothes, so even shes consciously aware of how she looks in her videos.

From what ive seen, she doesnt deserve demonetization because youtube has worse.. and shes providing educational content but its clear to me where the controversy lies, education + intentional sexual appeal. Id bet a large part of her audience is 10-18

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#378

Post by badRNG »

kragen wrote: post #344
badRNG wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Secondly, whether you like it or not, women are more likely to complain of male nudity in a venue than men are to complain of female nudity in a venue, yet you want to portray the argument as "men are the problem". Source? Anecdotally living in the South, it is overwhelmingly men complaining about women not properly conforming to their sensibility regarding modesty. I've never heard it the other way around, and you…

I've mostly heard men and women complaining about female nudity, but then you have flashers.

No post body was provided.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#379

Post by lucian1900 »

feupan wrote: post #228
chrischen wrote: post #193

For any Westerners here who seem to have a hard time understanding why this is wrong: Look at an even more women-oppressing culture such as that of Afghanistan under the Taliban. Women are required to cover their faces in public. Why? For "modesty." What it boils down to is that if women show their faces it could have a negative effect on men (sexual attraction). A lot of people where are shaming her for being essent…

> It takes a man to do the sexualization, so the sexualization isn't the boob I think you’re trying to rewrite the books that mention erogenous zones. Go read them instead. Boobs are sexual. Having said that, sexuality is not the problem; prudeness is. A vagina could be sexual and still be fine to be uncovered, as it is/was in some cultures.

Lips are also an erogenous zone.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#380

Post by darkerside »

Ancapistani wrote: post #171
oceanghost wrote: post #5

Sigh... while talented, she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Yes the algorithm is capricious, yes its arbitrary, and yes YouTube is evil. But she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I'm sure if I put my balls on YouTube they'd be more than dem…

> she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. Yeah, she’s definitely pushing the boundaries… but I’m not convinced that she does it to gain subscribers. I recall speaking with her in what I believe was her first “public” appearance on the Internet, on Reddit, several years ago. She put up with a lot of sexist crap[1], and disappeared for a while shortly thereafter. I thi…

She's doing it for attention, and that's ok, right? People want to be noticed, and they want to control what others notice about them (see fashion industry). I think there's some give and take that comes along with that. I don't find it that surprising that the bust video was demonetized, or any of the others, frankly. That's the cost of expanding the Overton window, I guess.
Post reply on HN