481
You can't see him!!!! (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 27 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I mean, the IEEE didn't really make that big of a deal about it. An email to members informing them of an update to https://magazines.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/create-your-ieee-magazine-article/article-submission-requirements/ hardly feels like hype. I think it's about the minimal fuss you can make while still allowing people to know about the change.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I mean, I'd agree that it's not really too interesting of a thing to report on, but... It just doesn't seem weird to me that they didn't talk about something, and then after something happened with it they did for a minute, and then they stopped again. Nine articles from a month ago, when they updated the policy, and none since doesn't scream "a ton" or "culture war" to me.

    And what is the act of class warfare being done here, in your view? What's the narrative or agenda being pushed?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    I think you're reading way to much into things.
    Nine articles is not a "wave" or "trending", and if you had read any of them they're essentially non-sensational, explain that the image is notable because of its role in the development of digital imagery, why they're moving away, and why that's for the best.

    Jumping from a small number of neutral articles in either explicitly technical or technology adjacent sources to a "wave" of sensationalist agitation targeting older dissatisfied white men is, frankly, really fucking weird.

    With your "I don't work in this field, why do I need to hear about this" it really feels like your saying anything you don't care about shouldn't be reported on, and if it is reported on, it's because someone must have an ulterior motive.
    It's been a near standard test image for decades. Deprecating it is a model case for a low stakes info piece if you're a tech publication. News you're not interested in isn't automatically cultural warfare.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent