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

491–500 of 579 posts

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#491

Post by igetspam »

naasking wrote: post #479
igetspam wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why do we loudly shame those that don't want to adhere? Who does it benefit? Does my heavily tattooed spouse need to know she's not your version of bangable? Does my bigger friend need to know that people don't find her size attractive, when she's happy about it? If we're going to discuss being charitable, we should start by allowing people to be happy with themselves and not share our thoughts on what we don't li…

> So why do we loudly shame those that don't want to adhere? Who does it benefit? It benefits them because they're expressing their values and preferences, which allows them to find others like them and build bonds over these shared values. A shitty way to do it maybe, but it always comes back to bonding. Edit: although some people shame out of genuine concern that the shamed party will not themselves be able to find…

> It benefits them because they're expressing their values and preferences, which allows them to find others like them and build bonds over these shared values. A shitty way to do it maybe, but it always comes back to bonding.

I'm comforted by the admission of how shitty that is. I don't agree with your premise but I don't have to. The end result is that we can converge on the idea that people should stop being so forthcoming about their opinions of what other people do to and for themselves. If that's all we could (collective we, not specific) ever do, that would make the world pattern and remove the examples from Publix that keeps the pattern of shitty behavior going.

> Edit: although some people shame out of genuine concern that the shamed party will not themselves be able to find human bonds. This is a type of shaming you often see from parents.

Parents shouldn't shame their children. That's shitty behavior too. It's also infantalizing, whether from a parent or not. I've never shamed my kid and I don't plan to. I dealt with that myself and I can tell you that it didn't reap the outcomes anyone could have been looking for. I haven't spoken to my parents in years.

> I'm not sure who "we" is. Society collectively is much more tolerant of deviations from normal dress, appearance and behaviour than they were even 10 years ago. Society takes time to adapt

I'm not so sure that's true. I may have agreed with you 10 years ago but now we have Incels and Red Pills and Men Going Their Own Way and people openly advocate raping women (I have a hard time knowing that's a real thing). I think we've regressed and we're more than happy to shame people for anything we don't agree with. Loudly. Constantly. To the point that we drive people to isolation because they're tired of the barrage. (look up You Look Like a Man for a perfect example of this)

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#492

Post by igetspam »

bradlys wrote: post #486
igetspam wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak to feminist scholars. It's far more entrenched than that. We have numerous systems deeply entrenched in our model for society that encourage this, specifically against women. We create incentives for insecurity and then prey on it. Keeping women under a microscope, consciously or not, maintains the status quo in business, government, public spaces, etc and as you follow the path back, it almost always has roots…

Depends on your position as a male. Barack Obama got made fun of for a tan/beige suit he wore once. Men get made fun of for what they wear all the time. So, I don’t get this argument that no one cares what men wear because we all certainly do. See mens wardrobe options vs womens. Compare the two - look at what is normal for one and normal for another. You’ll see one has far more selection than the other.

Yes but those are memorable and we laugh at them because they stand out. The volume of hate we throw at women is orders of magnitude worse. We don't even really pay attention to how often we slut/fat/ugly/etc shame women any more.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#493

Post by seanmcdirmid »

SexyCyborg wrote: post #47
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I know anything special here, but are there any PRC nationals who can have a relationship with YouTube while in the PRC? I can get foreign YouTubers establishing a relationship with YouTube via their home countries, or Chinese YouTubers abroad establishing relationships in their non-PRC resident countries, but it might be impossible to do it from inside the PRC as a Chinese since there isn’t much cooperation…

Others have, but I don't want to call them out on that and suggest preferential treatment, poor form.

It might be worth it to ask them about the process they went through if you don't know already. It could be some really trivial blocker that doesn't require much preferential treatment to get through.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#494

Post by dfxm12 »

bradlys wrote: post #486
igetspam wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak to feminist scholars. It's far more entrenched than that. We have numerous systems deeply entrenched in our model for society that encourage this, specifically against women. We create incentives for insecurity and then prey on it. Keeping women under a microscope, consciously or not, maintains the status quo in business, government, public spaces, etc and as you follow the path back, it almost always has roots…

Depends on your position as a male. Barack Obama got made fun of for a tan/beige suit he wore once. Men get made fun of for what they wear all the time. So, I don’t get this argument that no one cares what men wear because we all certainly do. See mens wardrobe options vs womens. Compare the two - look at what is normal for one and normal for another. You’ll see one has far more selection than the other.

insecurity but primarily insecurity about losing power and control

Interestingly enough, this probably applies to the people who were dismissing Obama on the basis of that tan suit as well.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#495

Post by Seattle3503 »

colechristensen wrote: post #487
Seattle3503 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Christian group Exodus Cry got Pornhub's payment processing capabilities revoked over involuntary porn hysteria.

The involuntary porn thing seemed pretty real and the not so fringe group… er the New York Times certainly helped.

Facebook allowed users to foment genocide (also NYT article). They didn't lose payment processing. The point that puritanical elements are seeking to push sexuality away still stands. Facebook apologizes and promises to moderate better. Pornhub gets cut off at the knees.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#496

Post by bArray »

Youtube appear to have forgotten about the creators. I miss the wild west days of Youtube when it was growing and anything went. Now we don't have a dislike button, comments get randomly deleted, everything is decided by a random opaque AI and small creators don't get paid. Who now gets to the front page? The highly-polished advertiser friendly mainstream content I went to Youtube to escape from.

I don't agree with some of Naomi Wu's comments about her being specifically targeted for some characteristic, I really suspect she is just an unfortunate victim of the same dumb "human review" everybody is. Some low paid person working for Youtube has X seconds to discern between 'porn' and 'not porn' - they see large breasts and think 'porn'.

The main problem here is they optimized all humanity out of their system. There's no empathy, there's no justice, there's no room for change. It's not a platform I have enjoyed using for a long time now, and it's only because of people like Naomi Wu or EEVBlog that I even interact with it at all. I think most people are looking for a compelling reason to leave.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#497

Post by Animats »

richardfey wrote: post #342
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…

> The "let's increase housing density" crowd from Strong Towns should watch those videos. Perhaps there is a good balance that we can reach?

Shenzhen went from 30,000 to 16 million people in three decades without turning into a mess like Mumbai or Rio. That's impressive.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#498

Post by jb1991 »

spacechild1 wrote: post #469
akudha wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember getting a book on spirituality whose author is an attractive young woman. She had rather suggestive photos of herself throughout the book and the book's content had nothing to do with the photos (and it was wasting space, the book would have been a few pages shorter without the photos). The book itself was pretty good, but it was really annoying to see her photos everywhere. There is not one reason for sug…

Her appearance is part of her (sexual) identity: https://twitter.com/realsexycyborg/status/139660540781712998... Of course, she could hide it, but she just doesn't want to.

Wow, that thread. Sexual identities have become very complicated.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#499

Post by SpelingBeeChamp »

zwily wrote: post #445
SpelingBeeChamp wrote: post #429

Hold on. Naomi Wu is not demonetized. A video that Naomi Wu created was demonetized, or as YouTube puts it, found to not be suitable for all advertisers. Creating content on YouTube has been my full-time job for nearly four years. There is a HUGE difference between a channel being kicked out of the Partner Program and a video being 'demonetized.' (Namely, that in the latter case, all of your other videos, past and fu…

If you go through that Twitter thread, it seems like her videos pretty consistently get demonetized, even if the channel as a whole is not.

Sounds like selection bias. She is not going to Tweet about videos that are monetized.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#500

Post by meheleventyone »

jacknews wrote: post #454
meheleventyone wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dislike isn't the same thing as questioning his merit as a footballer though. Especially as he is widely heralded as the being one of the best players of all time. I'd also suggest that disliking Ronaldo because he poses in sexy adverts is also pretty closely aligned with the same cultural issues that lead to dismissing women. And whilst I can definitely agree there will be some men who dismiss Ronaldo's merit as a f…

But Ronaldo became famous for his football, not his sexy body. Everyone knows sex sells, but some people (not only men) get upset when they see people promoting themselves with their own sexuality, especially when it's in an unrelated field. I think Naomi is great, but I can see why some people get upset by the way she presents. I wonder how less attractive maker women feel about her, for example?

People weren’t just upset at how she looks they outright questioned her technical merit because of how she looks. And yes women can have misogynistic views as well which are just as unacceptable.
Post reply on HN