Google bans cryptocurrency ads

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 6:51 PM UTC

mercer wrote: post #208

aptsurdist wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was another thread commenting on the usage of the term "chick" and how it can be interpreted as derogatory. I agree that this term can be derogatory because it can be condescending. The commenter who took offense was flagged, and nested replies derided the commenter for taking offense. I am really disappointed to see the hacker news community unable to appreciate the nuance of this discussion. I know this term…

I think for many (myself included) it's not about being unable to appreciate the nuance. It's rather that it gets extremely tiresome to read a comment that 1) seems tonally out of proportion, and 2) comes across as 'white-knighting', as in, policing others on behalf of (hypothetical) others. While I try not to react too strongly to this behavior (and instead see the intention behind it, which I'd say is commendable),…

Post by Raphmedia » Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 7:03 PM UTC

mercer wrote: post #252

Raphmedia wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did comment on that fact: > Modern usage associates the use of "chick" with the beauty of the individual. Calling a woman a "chick" is using her physical appearance to describe her, disregarding her actual skills and achievements.

I'd say that's another issue, namely that most words don't have one single, clear meaning, as is evident from a bunch of other comments. It's equally pedantic and cause-harming to pretend that this is not the case. I can definitely accept that in many circles 'chick' has this connotation, and, again, I'm happy to be cautious in my use of the word if I don't know for certain whether this is the case or not. That said,…

Post by root_axis » Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 7:12 PM UTC

Raphmedia wrote: post #238

root_axis wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your analysis is a bit heavy-handed. Most people have a common understanding of this word. Referring to a woman as "this chick" is obviously a tone that lacks respect and most American males understand the subtle differences in connotation between "chick" and "dude". Yes, they are mostly interchangeable but in certain contexts the word "chick" can carry a somewhat dismissive tone with a little more intensity…

It is not about respecting authority. It is about respecting strangers and using the proper words to describe them. Since that person is not present, it is best to be as formal as possible. Call men "a man", call women "a woman", boys "a boy" and girls "a girl". Using words like "babe", "chick", "kiddo" for people you don't know is a blatant lack of respect. Using "a chick" in the current context is plain wrong to me…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 7:18 PM UTC

ggggtez wrote: post #221

whataretensors wrote: post #214

We've created a generation of people who will do anything they are told to do. Now these big corps and governments feel like they have to baby-proof the world because we've created a bunch of lemmings who will give all their money to an ICO because a banner told them to.

"You are the 1 millionth visitor! Click here to claim your prize!" Please. People have always been gullible, it's just that the scams have moved to more lucrative enterprises.

Post by sctb » Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 7:20 PM UTC

purple-again wrote: post #49

Wow thanks for that, this chick seems awesome. Maybe my reading comprehension is shit but I never saw where she linked to her 'centralized feelings on bitcoin' or whatever. Did anyone see where that is? I've been sitting here in my little traditional finance world shaking my head at Bitcoin for years and would love to see her much more elegantly written tear down.