3 ms·
It seems to match her wishes. You don't need an ethical argument to make a kind gesture to an icon, just make a statement and let everyone move on. There's effe
by jvanderbot 3y ago
It seems to match her wishes. You don't need an ethical argument to make a kind gesture to an icon, just make a statement and let everyone move on. There's effectively zero cost.
- bawolff 3y agoTheir statement is that it is required by their code of ethics. So they made an ethical statement whether they needed to or not.
- jvanderbot 3y agoIt feels like a flimsy justification but I'm not sure what kind of person would push back and insist on using that image against both her wishes and the wishes of the leadership of IEEE.
- bawolff 3y agoFlimsy justifications become precedent and eventually become norms. I don't have any actual objection to no longer using it. I just don't like the justification.
- jvanderbot 3y agoWell the explicit justification is not the real justification. That's all. I find once I realize that I'm content, but perhaps I'm just making up stories.
- jsheard 3y agoThe rationale for continuing to use it is pretty flimsy as well, so it's not like we lose much by doing away with it. It's poorly sourced, being a low resolution 1970s vintage scan of a magazine print rather than the original film negatives, and the rights holders never really gave permission to redistribute it. Surely there are better test images to use even on purely technical and legal grounds.
- _3u10 3y agoThere’s nothing unethical about her photo. Lena’s career choice is hers alone and it should not be considered unethical.