7 ms·

Running a CNC machine is definitely about sex and should be demonetized

24 points by marklyon 5y ago

DaveExeter 5y ago
I'm going to have to side with Youtube on this one. https://youtu.be/7u7lZQQZm2s?t=474 https://youtu.be/7u7lZQQZm2s?t=474 I like softcore, and I like CNC, but never realized that a combination of both would work as well!
- gompertz 5y ago
  Agreed as well. Naomi seems to have a lot of drama follow her around.
- chomp 5y ago
  Remember a while ago when the “women in stem” (or whatever it was) hashtag took off and women took selfies with what they wear in the lab and at work? Lo and behold, women dress like normal people when working in the lab or with their work equipment. Let’s not act like Naomi isn’t running the influencer gig and doesn’t know what she’s doing here. If she wanted to do a tech video about her CNC machine, then do that, but leave out the eye roll inducing camera shots.
  - thrill 5y ago
    Or as they used to say in the olden times ... you could just not watch it.
    - x0x0 5y ago
      Nobody is arguing over watching it, or whether people should be able to (turns out they can). They're arguing over whether youtube's (predominantly brand) advertisers are going to want to have advertising displayed alongside this, and whether youtube has the right to make that call.
    - chomp 5y ago
      I don’t watch YouTube/Instagram/Tiktok at all, I feel that the content that people produce is more often than not manipulative, and the algorithms take care of the rest.
  - mcphage 5y ago
    > women took selfies with what they wear in the lab and at work? Lo and behold, women dress like normal people when working in the lab or with their work equipment. Ah, the good ol' "Wear what you want—but not like that!"
    - chomp 5y ago
      No… because that would imply I’m attempting to police what people wear. I am not. My complaint is with Naomi putting words into Google’s mouth and jumping to the extremes, which is completely disingenuous. It has to be, because she’s smart enough to know why content from someone who’s built their personal brand as @SexyCyborg could sometimes be a little too sexy. This isn’t a women in stem issue, it’s a “I wanna sell risqué content to Google and Google won’t buy it” issue.
      - mcphage 5y ago
        > No… because that would imply I’m attempting to police what people wear. I am not. Well, that's because it really sounds like you are. There was a very strongly implied 'Why can't Naomi dress more respectable, like those women using the women in stem hash tag?'
        chomp 5y ago
        Sorry, I understand now. My intent was to show that there is a distinct, measurable difference between normal people and influencers in terms of their appearances and behavior in real life. However, I can see how part of that could be seen as policing what people wear. My claim remains the same though, that her brand is built around creating risqué science content and so the linked Twitter thread is manufactured outrage.
- x0x0 5y ago
  hot chips though...
sschueller 5y ago
Americans are puritans, don't expect SV companies to be any different. They do what the advertising industry wants or they don't make money. I mean television channels censor a peeing dogs genitals and people get all out raged when you have a dog that is not fixed.
blueblisters 5y ago
"focus on sexual body parts; blurred or censored nudity with discernible body parts, even when used in an educational context or news reporting" God YouTube is really puritanical.
- angryasian 5y ago
  "advertising friendly" is the right term. If society were to ever change then these guidelines would change.
  - mcphage 5y ago
    > "advertising friendly" is the right term. "American advertising friendly" is the right term. Advertising in many other countries has actual nudity, which is a big step beyond anything Naomi does.
cyounkins 5y ago
The name of the channel has 'sexy' in it.
908B64B197 5y ago
"findings by a human" Yet there's no contact information. Sure... must be a real human...
jandrese 5y ago
IMHO there is a middle ground between spaghetti straps with copious side boob and "trad-wife shit". This channel is pushing the boundaries and the boundaries pushed back.
- nathanaldensr 5y ago
  Correct. She presents a false dichotomy in order to establish YouTube's position as extreme.
- detaro 5y ago
  In many ways more "the boundaries push her out even when she is playing 'nice' with the rules, so there is no point in trying".
  - jandrese 5y ago
    Oh yeah, playing "nice" with the rules like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7_zwFGz1aU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7_zwFGz1aU Frustratingly there is very little "testing" happening in the video. No running, jumping, or even swimming. She doesn't even ask any of the other people if it looks good. It's 100% "ogle me while I move around slowly and pan the camera all over my body."
npwr 5y ago
Maybe we should avoid letting twitter drama reach HN.
oceanghost 5y ago
Except she uses sex to promote her channel. Pretending the issue is women in STEM is dishonest. There are plenty of women who have STEM channels that are dressed in a dignified manor. (Xyla Foxlin for instance).
- detaro 5y ago
  Expecting that you conform to a standard about whatever some company thinks is "dignified" for women is a women in STEM issue. (along the lines of people trying to shame women in STEM about having the audacity to not look "professional" in all their social media pictures) And plenty non-tech influencers are playing up the "looking sexy" way more and somehow that isn't a problem.
  - dekhn 5y ago
    I will generally defend the right of everybody to wear more or less whatever they want (I'm a t-shirt and shorts kinda guy) but I find that this particular youtuber goes out of her way to gain viewership through stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the primary topic of the videos. Personally, I find it distracting from the content (and her content is often interesting), but then again, I prefer videos of autistic woodworkers who rarely if ever talk (https://www.youtube.com/c/OlivierGomis/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/OlivierGomis/videos). I would say the same thing if it was a hunky guy in a bathing suit doing CNC. Either way, youtube should not demonetize her videos for dressing the way she does.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - oceanghost 5y ago
      Spot on. I'd like to pile on-- I can't remember where I picked this up, but, a way to evaluate visual communications for tone and intent is to watch the video with the sound off. Words often trip us up and tie up different parts of your brain. If you watch this gals channel with the sound off... It's prurient, in my opinion.
happytoexplain 5y ago
While there is an argument to be made about how much YouTube should cater to advertisers, and what kind of adult content kids should consume, perhaps with supervision, I don't see where commenters are getting dramatic accusations of "puritanical" from. The content is obviously adult, and all YouTube did was label it as such, which gives advertisers the option of avoiding it (again, what advertisers want is assailable and relevant here, but I can't see any moral problem with YouTube simply labeling adult content - that's just useful information).
- iaw 5y ago
  Could you explain why the content is "obviously adult"?
  - aequitas 5y ago
    I wouldn't want my kids playing with a CNC machine like that at their age. At least not without adult supervision.
    - iaw 5y ago
      Of all the answers here.... I think you gave the right one. Children should never be allowed near tools without close adult supervision.
      - happytoexplain 5y ago
        It's counterproductive to essentially insist "everybody is just wrong" when the topic is so subjective.
        iaw 5y ago
        From your other comment: > But it seems pointless to try to make a semantic argument that excludes her content from any reasonable definition of the word "adult". With this statement aren't you doing the same thing? Obviously, I don't see anything illicit with her showing the side of her breast. It's gratuitous but that's the internet. I've seen more explicit content in art museums, does your definition extend to the classics?
verdverm 5y ago
Comparing to how Twitch... encourages the hustle over there... Naomi is far better content than Amouranth and the similar
Ajay-p 5y ago
Does this remind anyone of "booth babes" ? Is that still a thing at trade shows?
- kyriakos 5y ago
  Trade shows still a thing? But booth babes concept objectifies women. This is a completely different situation and I believe people should be able to wear whatever they want.
- mcphage 5y ago
  Booth babes were models hired to advertise for a company. Naomi is an engineer who dresses how she wants to dress.
  - angryasian 5y ago
    yes she can dress how she want, but youtube can disable monetizing her videos. thats how it works
    - mcphage 5y ago
      YouTube can. But comparing her to a booth babe is still insulting and inappropriate.
- jandrese 5y ago
  Booth babes have been on the way out for a few years now. They're not extinct, but even back in 2019 they were much less prevalent than they used to be.
ksaj 5y ago
I remember when people thought that about anything Dolly Parton did. Ironically for the same very old fashioned reason. Men don't do this as often, but lest we forget firemen calendars...

24 points by marklyon 5y ago

I'm going to have to side with Youtube on this one. https://youtu.be/7u7lZQQZm2s?t=474 https://youtu.be/7u7lZQQZm2s?t=474 I like softcore, and I like CNC, but never realized that a combination of both would work as well!

gompertz 5y ago
Agreed as well. Naomi seems to have a lot of drama follow her around.
chomp 5y ago
Remember a while ago when the “women in stem” (or whatever it was) hashtag took off and women took selfies with what they wear in the lab and at work? Lo and behold, women dress like normal people when working in the lab or with their work equipment. Let’s not act like Naomi isn’t running the influencer gig and doesn’t know what she’s doing here. If she wanted to do a tech video about her CNC machine, then do that, but leave out the eye roll inducing camera shots.
- thrill 5y ago
  Or as they used to say in the olden times ... you could just not watch it.
  - x0x0 5y ago
    Nobody is arguing over watching it, or whether people should be able to (turns out they can). They're arguing over whether youtube's (predominantly brand) advertisers are going to want to have advertising displayed alongside this, and whether youtube has the right to make that call.
  - chomp 5y ago
    I don’t watch YouTube/Instagram/Tiktok at all, I feel that the content that people produce is more often than not manipulative, and the algorithms take care of the rest.
- mcphage 5y ago
  > women took selfies with what they wear in the lab and at work? Lo and behold, women dress like normal people when working in the lab or with their work equipment. Ah, the good ol' "Wear what you want—but not like that!"
  - chomp 5y ago
    No… because that would imply I’m attempting to police what people wear. I am not. My complaint is with Naomi putting words into Google’s mouth and jumping to the extremes, which is completely disingenuous. It has to be, because she’s smart enough to know why content from someone who’s built their personal brand as @SexyCyborg could sometimes be a little too sexy. This isn’t a women in stem issue, it’s a “I wanna sell risqué content to Google and Google won’t buy it” issue.
    - mcphage 5y ago
      > No… because that would imply I’m attempting to police what people wear. I am not. Well, that's because it really sounds like you are. There was a very strongly implied 'Why can't Naomi dress more respectable, like those women using the women in stem hash tag?'
      - chomp 5y ago
        Sorry, I understand now. My intent was to show that there is a distinct, measurable difference between normal people and influencers in terms of their appearances and behavior in real life. However, I can see how part of that could be seen as policing what people wear. My claim remains the same though, that her brand is built around creating risqué science content and so the linked Twitter thread is manufactured outrage.
x0x0 5y ago
hot chips though...

sschueller 5y ago

Americans are puritans, don't expect SV companies to be any different. They do what the advertising industry wants or they don't make money. I mean television channels censor a peeing dogs genitals and people get all out raged when you have a dog that is not fixed.

blueblisters 5y ago

"focus on sexual body parts; blurred or censored nudity with discernible body parts, even when used in an educational context or news reporting" God YouTube is really puritanical.

angryasian 5y ago
"advertising friendly" is the right term. If society were to ever change then these guidelines would change.
- mcphage 5y ago
  > "advertising friendly" is the right term. "American advertising friendly" is the right term. Advertising in many other countries has actual nudity, which is a big step beyond anything Naomi does.

cyounkins 5y ago

The name of the channel has 'sexy' in it.

908B64B197 5y ago

"findings by a human" Yet there's no contact information. Sure... must be a real human...

jandrese 5y ago

IMHO there is a middle ground between spaghetti straps with copious side boob and "trad-wife shit". This channel is pushing the boundaries and the boundaries pushed back.

nathanaldensr 5y ago
Correct. She presents a false dichotomy in order to establish YouTube's position as extreme.
detaro 5y ago
In many ways more "the boundaries push her out even when she is playing 'nice' with the rules, so there is no point in trying".
- jandrese 5y ago
  Oh yeah, playing "nice" with the rules like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7_zwFGz1aU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7_zwFGz1aU Frustratingly there is very little "testing" happening in the video. No running, jumping, or even swimming. She doesn't even ask any of the other people if it looks good. It's 100% "ogle me while I move around slowly and pan the camera all over my body."

npwr 5y ago

Maybe we should avoid letting twitter drama reach HN.

oceanghost 5y ago

Except she uses sex to promote her channel. Pretending the issue is women in STEM is dishonest. There are plenty of women who have STEM channels that are dressed in a dignified manor. (Xyla Foxlin for instance).

detaro 5y ago
Expecting that you conform to a standard about whatever some company thinks is "dignified" for women is a women in STEM issue. (along the lines of people trying to shame women in STEM about having the audacity to not look "professional" in all their social media pictures) And plenty non-tech influencers are playing up the "looking sexy" way more and somehow that isn't a problem.
- dekhn 5y ago
  I will generally defend the right of everybody to wear more or less whatever they want (I'm a t-shirt and shorts kinda guy) but I find that this particular youtuber goes out of her way to gain viewership through stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the primary topic of the videos. Personally, I find it distracting from the content (and her content is often interesting), but then again, I prefer videos of autistic woodworkers who rarely if ever talk (https://www.youtube.com/c/OlivierGomis/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/OlivierGomis/videos). I would say the same thing if it was a hunky guy in a bathing suit doing CNC. Either way, youtube should not demonetize her videos for dressing the way she does.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - oceanghost 5y ago
    Spot on. I'd like to pile on-- I can't remember where I picked this up, but, a way to evaluate visual communications for tone and intent is to watch the video with the sound off. Words often trip us up and tie up different parts of your brain. If you watch this gals channel with the sound off... It's prurient, in my opinion.

happytoexplain 5y ago

While there is an argument to be made about how much YouTube should cater to advertisers, and what kind of adult content kids should consume, perhaps with supervision, I don't see where commenters are getting dramatic accusations of "puritanical" from. The content is obviously adult, and all YouTube did was label it as such, which gives advertisers the option of avoiding it (again, what advertisers want is assailable and relevant here, but I can't see any moral problem with YouTube simply labeling adult content - that's just useful information).

iaw 5y ago
Could you explain why the content is "obviously adult"?
- aequitas 5y ago
  I wouldn't want my kids playing with a CNC machine like that at their age. At least not without adult supervision.
  - iaw 5y ago
    Of all the answers here.... I think you gave the right one. Children should never be allowed near tools without close adult supervision.
    - happytoexplain 5y ago
      It's counterproductive to essentially insist "everybody is just wrong" when the topic is so subjective.
      - iaw 5y ago
        From your other comment: > But it seems pointless to try to make a semantic argument that excludes her content from any reasonable definition of the word "adult". With this statement aren't you doing the same thing? Obviously, I don't see anything illicit with her showing the side of her breast. It's gratuitous but that's the internet. I've seen more explicit content in art museums, does your definition extend to the classics?

verdverm 5y ago

Comparing to how Twitch... encourages the hustle over there... Naomi is far better content than Amouranth and the similar

Ajay-p 5y ago

Does this remind anyone of "booth babes" ? Is that still a thing at trade shows?

kyriakos 5y ago
Trade shows still a thing? But booth babes concept objectifies women. This is a completely different situation and I believe people should be able to wear whatever they want.
mcphage 5y ago
Booth babes were models hired to advertise for a company. Naomi is an engineer who dresses how she wants to dress.
- angryasian 5y ago
  yes she can dress how she want, but youtube can disable monetizing her videos. thats how it works
  - mcphage 5y ago
    YouTube can. But comparing her to a booth babe is still insulting and inappropriate.
jandrese 5y ago
Booth babes have been on the way out for a few years now. They're not extinct, but even back in 2019 they were much less prevalent than they used to be.

ksaj 5y ago

I remember when people thought that about anything Dolly Parton did. Ironically for the same very old fashioned reason. Men don't do this as often, but lest we forget firemen calendars...