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

Guthib

guthib.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 137 posts

Re: Guthib

#81

Post by prange »

osrec wrote: post #73
hahamrfunnyguy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What about Yoda driving a go-kart is even remotely offensive?! A client being offended at something like that is a bit of a red flag for me...

Perhaps the client is an ‘American Jedi’.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5...

Re: Guthib

#82

Post by hoosieree »

jp57 wrote: post #37

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…

Anecdotally, I've typed gihtub many times, but never guthib. Related: enabling a spell checker in my editor was a very humbling experience.

Re: Guthib

#83

Post by codetrotter »

bragr wrote: post #59
jp57 wrote: post #37

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…

>if you touch-type, they belong to different fingers Not all touch-typers use or ever even learned the formal touch-type method.

And also, not all touch-typers use QWERTY ;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak_keyboard_layout

Re: Guthib

#84

Post by chaorace »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #30
RivieraKid wrote: post #27

I don't understand why people upvote this garbage. Do they find it funny? Or interesting?

> 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] [1]: http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html

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.

Re: Guthib

#86

Post by egeozcan »

gw99 wrote: post #72
hahamrfunnyguy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Some people are waiting to be offended. I used Mighty Boosh as a test image a couple of years back and was told off for it. https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy

This offended me by refusing to show anything without js! (I'm not serious, just in case that wasn't clear)

Re: Guthib

#87

Post by jlkuester7 »

googlryas wrote: post #68
moron4hire wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could at my job. My company is 80% women. They'd find it hilarious. EDIT: Actually, just checked. They did find it hilarious.

Women aren't the arbiter of what is sfw or nsfw. 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?

Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them....

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

Re: Guthib

#88

Post by prange »

edmcnulty101 wrote: post #28
plg wrote: post #6

I always thought someone should make a github for cooking recipes and call it guthub

Or a gun site called Gathub.com.

When you said that, my first thought was - that would be for open source gun designs.

Of course it’s actually already a real thing: http://www.gathub.com/?p=28

Re: Guthib

#89

Post by brendank310 »

edmcnulty101 wrote: post #28
plg wrote: post #6

I always thought someone should make a github for cooking recipes and call it guthub

Or a gun site called Gathub.com.

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

Re: Guthib

#90

Post by numpad0 »

metadat wrote: post #50
sschueller wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's not. 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.

No it's not nsfw? Now I'm really confused, can I very paste this into slack #random or not?

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.
Post reply on HN