3 ms·

I think it's a reflection of a lot of culture war stuff that so many comments are about the ethics of the image and the opinions of the subject of a photograph

I think it's a reflection of a lot of culture war stuff that so many comments are about the ethics of the image and the opinions of the subject of a photograph and all this other really difficult philosophical argument stuff when it really seems much more simple than that: 40 years ago we used one particular image to test compression and certain DSP operations. Now in the age of CGI, TBs rather than KBs of storage / bandwidth, and the internet, we can use a suite of examples. These can be more varied, more controlled, and less encumbered by copyright or being from an erotic publication. MP3 was apparently tested against the a capella song "Tom's Diner." Nice song, lots of detail on the voice. But is the benchmark I want to be using nowadays for Opus and AAC? Probably not. It's a shame rules have to be made to force behavior. But whatever people's philosophical views, it should be a prompt to ensure we do have things to fill this role that have benefited from those last 40 years of development.

ralfd 3y ago
I mostly agree, but: > It's a shame rules have to be made to force behavior. „Have to“ is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the sentence. Is this rule really necessary (because Lena’s gaze is just to enticing and leading the whole field astray)? Or is it just a method for moral crusaders to declare victory and their morals as supreme?
low_tech_love 3y ago
It is not as simple as you put because the decision was not technical, it was political/ideological. To discuss its technical relevance is meaningless; everybody knows the image is bad and should not be used in 2024. The fact that it is still used is a testament to the deplorable situation of academia itself, but has nothing to do with this ban. They banned it because (a few, very loud) women felt uncomfortable about it and decided to turn it into a crusade. And IEEE (as with most other organizations nowadays) are rightfully scared to make a fuss over something so small and petty. It's a small, almost meaningless loss for the IEEE, and a big meaningful win for those who actually care about something like this. And so it goes, little by little, they win.
- SpecialistK 3y ago
  You may have a point, it isn't my fight because it's not my field and it doesn't personally offend me. I would probably feel different if it was porting Doom to every platform ever that was under scrutiny. And if that comes up, I would be more defensive and philosophical about it. I both know about and care about it more. So I'm going to ponder on that for a bit.

ralfd 3y ago

I mostly agree, but: > It's a shame rules have to be made to force behavior. „Have to“ is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the sentence. Is this rule really necessary (because Lena’s gaze is just to enticing and leading the whole field astray)? Or is it just a method for moral crusaders to declare victory and their morals as supreme?

low_tech_love 3y ago

It is not as simple as you put because the decision was not technical, it was political/ideological. To discuss its technical relevance is meaningless; everybody knows the image is bad and should not be used in 2024. The fact that it is still used is a testament to the deplorable situation of academia itself, but has nothing to do with this ban. They banned it because (a few, very loud) women felt uncomfortable about it and decided to turn it into a crusade. And IEEE (as with most other organizations nowadays) are rightfully scared to make a fuss over something so small and petty. It's a small, almost meaningless loss for the IEEE, and a big meaningful win for those who actually care about something like this. And so it goes, little by little, they win.

SpecialistK 3y ago
You may have a point, it isn't my fight because it's not my field and it doesn't personally offend me. I would probably feel different if it was porting Doom to every platform ever that was under scrutiny. And if that comes up, I would be more defensive and philosophical about it. I both know about and care about it more. So I'm going to ponder on that for a bit.