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

Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 60 posts

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#21

Post by SiempreViernes »

ramraj07 wrote: post #11
DagAgren wrote: post #2

> For a long time, building shitty robots meant Giertz never had to face failure, even if the robots themselves failed. “One of the things that I've been trying to figure out is: Was building shitty robots in some way a method for me to minimize myself, to make myself smaller?” Giertz says. “Because that's what I notice—a lot of women being really scared to step up and be an expert.” This rings really true, and as fu…

On the contrary, it's a bit sad that she failed to see the real value she was offering - she didn't have to worry about the robot failing, but she most definitely had to worry about the VIDEO failing. An uninteresting video with a flawless robot is far less interesting than a video from Simone about a knife chopping robot that can't really chop, because it was still funny and insightful. She started the genre but it'…

> I ask her whether [the brain tumor] helped mark this turning point for her. The answer is yes, but also no. Even before the brain tumor, Giertz says, she was starting to feel like “it was harder and harder to come up with ideas. I was always concerned that it was eventually going to be like beating a dead horse, and that the joke was going to be over and I didn't have anywhere else to go.”

I don't read this being about insecurities but rather more about physical comedy not really being something that comes easily for Giertz, and the stress associated with the brain tumour forcing the early abandonment of that sort of work.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#22

Post by CydeWeys »

macspoofing wrote: post #10
DagAgren wrote: post #2

> For a long time, building shitty robots meant Giertz never had to face failure, even if the robots themselves failed. “One of the things that I've been trying to figure out is: Was building shitty robots in some way a method for me to minimize myself, to make myself smaller?” Giertz says. “Because that's what I notice—a lot of women being really scared to step up and be an expert.” This rings really true, and as fu…

>She's really funny and talented and deserves a lot more than shitty robots. Why? There's nothing wrong with moving onto other things and pursuing other interests, but she has this perplexing perspective (which you echoed in this statement) that somehow the 'shitty robots' content was something to look down on. It was good stuff, and if she wanted to continue, it would have been perfectly fine and something you could…

She has bigger aspirations than making shitty robots for a joke and YouTube ad revenue.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#24

Post by Wowfunhappy »

DagAgren wrote: post #17
worldsayshi wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making "shitty robots" seem to me as the perfect stepping stone towards building actually good robots. I don't see that there can be any better way to learn really (It makes you deliver something that also makes you learn something). Except maybe doing that while also studying all the theory that you may possibly make use of when building robots.

But as she says, she wasn't doing that. She was making funny videos about crap robots so she wouldn't have to face the fear of trying to build something good, and failing. That isn't learning, it's the exact opposite. And that is why she stopped.

I think there's more nuance to it than that. I could not build any of her "shitty" robots. They were almost certainly a learning experience. That she also managed to entertain and even inspire others through that learning experience is a great accomplishment.

She shouldn't be so hard on herself. If calling the projects "shitty" gave her permission to fail, well, failing is also a part of learning.

Now she's ready to progress to "useful" robots—or other projects altogether. That makes sense.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#25

Post by macspoofing »

CydeWeys wrote: post #22
macspoofing wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>She's really funny and talented and deserves a lot more than shitty robots. Why? There's nothing wrong with moving onto other things and pursuing other interests, but she has this perplexing perspective (which you echoed in this statement) that somehow the 'shitty robots' content was something to look down on. It was good stuff, and if she wanted to continue, it would have been perfectly fine and something you could…

She has bigger aspirations than making shitty robots for a joke and YouTube ad revenue.

And there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, that's great. Sometimes people don't know when to give up a shtick and end up being typecast for decades.

The part that's perplexing is why she (and some others) see that content as somehow beneath her and why she has this general negative and insecure attitude towards the "shitty robots" content she created. That content entertained a lot of people and allowed her to stand out from the mass of other Youtube content creators.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#26

Post by cptskippy »

bhouston wrote: post #4

My daughter, who is interested in science and engineering loved the shitty robot videos. It was a form of engineering comedy. I guess if she wasn't a women, creating shitty robots would be just funny and inventive way that she figured out how to make money. Comedians make people laugh using inventive and unexpected constructions, she was no different. A lot of comedians do things that are in one way or another demean…

> A lot of comedians do things that are in one way or another demeaning to themselves or showing a lack of self-respect, but they do it because they actually incredibly confident in themselves that they can stand up and make those jokes.

Many struggle with anxiety and depression, and are self deprecating as a defense mechanism because the criticism of others is less harsh when you've already done it to yourself.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#27

Post by sixothree »

DagAgren wrote: post #2

> For a long time, building shitty robots meant Giertz never had to face failure, even if the robots themselves failed. “One of the things that I've been trying to figure out is: Was building shitty robots in some way a method for me to minimize myself, to make myself smaller?” Giertz says. “Because that's what I notice—a lot of women being really scared to step up and be an expert.” This rings really true, and as fu…

I do hope we still get to see her failures. I watch a lot of hobby/project channels and I like to know about the hurdles they faced. When a project becomes a complete failure and no product whatsoever is created I like to watch the postmortems.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#28

Post by sixothree »

I have a random observation about the comments sections of the types of videos she makes. In videos that feature female makers, commenters seem to address them by first name far more often than happens in the male maker videos. I am not sure why it bothers me but it feels off.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#29

Post by uname_a »

bhouston wrote: post #4

My daughter, who is interested in science and engineering loved the shitty robot videos. It was a form of engineering comedy. I guess if she wasn't a women, creating shitty robots would be just funny and inventive way that she figured out how to make money. Comedians make people laugh using inventive and unexpected constructions, she was no different. A lot of comedians do things that are in one way or another demean…

I have to admit that I am surprised that neither the article nor any of the HN posters have mentioned Rube Goldberg, whose humorous cartoons involving improbable contraptions to solve everyday problems seems to me an obvious predecessor to Simone Giertz.

Re: Why the ‘Queen of Shitty Robots’ Renounced Her Crown

#30

Post by cptskippy »

DagAgren wrote: post #2

> For a long time, building shitty robots meant Giertz never had to face failure, even if the robots themselves failed. “One of the things that I've been trying to figure out is: Was building shitty robots in some way a method for me to minimize myself, to make myself smaller?” Giertz says. “Because that's what I notice—a lot of women being really scared to step up and be an expert.” This rings really true, and as fu…

I have a lot of mixed, mostly melancholy feelings about her self reflection there. The talk about imposter syndrome and self deprecation is something that rings true to a lot of talented people, not just women, and the power of her videos is that she demonstrates that failure is a part of success.

With most media you usually see a carefully choreographed final product that appears flawless and intimdating. You don't get to see the process or what lead up to it. What her videos demonstrate is that failure and imperfection are ok and part of the process.

A good example of this is Bon Appétit Magazine, it arrives as a finished product that appears, on the surface, to be perfect and unassailable. If you watch their videos on Youtube you get a much different perspective and get to see all the flaws and mistakes in the process that leads up to the magazine. Giertz brings that to engineering and that's what's so powerful about her work.

I agree that there are a lot of people, not just women, who are afraid to step up and be an expert. I believe that fear is what drives people to become experts, while simultaneously holding them back. Her growth and self actualization are both powerful and inspiring, and at the same time sad because it means she probably can't create more of those early videos that were very special. Even still her growth and continued aspirations will produce ever more inspiration for others.

Post reply on HN