Comments for http://sobsister.com Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:02:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 Comment on iPhone sexiness by dogboi http://sobsister.com/2010/02/23/iphone-debate/#comment-1196 dogboi Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:09:23 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=1009#comment-1196 If the issue was objectification, then Apple would have removed the apps from Playboy and Sports Illustrated, or does having a corporate relationship to pornography over the long haul negate objectification. Also, there are plenty of apps in the app store that have images of beefy, half-naked men. Is objectification of the male form allowed, while objectification of the female form is banned? This is censorship, pure and simple. Censorship is a very slippery slope. Perhaps, for example, I am offended by Christianity. There are many like me. Can we have all apps related to Christianity removed from the App store? Perhaps violence offends me (and many others). Should we remove all violence, including games, from the App store? If the issue was objectification, then Apple would have removed the apps from Playboy and Sports Illustrated, or does having a corporate relationship to pornography over the long haul negate objectification. Also, there are plenty of apps in the app store that have images of beefy, half-naked men. Is objectification of the male form allowed, while objectification of the female form is banned?

This is censorship, pure and simple. Censorship is a very slippery slope. Perhaps, for example, I am offended by Christianity. There are many like me. Can we have all apps related to Christianity removed from the App store? Perhaps violence offends me (and many others). Should we remove all violence, including games, from the App store?

]]> Comment on iPhone sexiness by Chelsey http://sobsister.com/2010/02/23/iphone-debate/#comment-1195 Chelsey Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:15:30 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=1009#comment-1195 I understand where you are coming from, but look at this this way. You are talking about this as if it's a violation of freedom of information--like Apple is "censoring" these things. In reality this is just a BUSINESS DECISION. Barnes & Noble does not carry pornography because it is a BUSINESS DECISION. Blockbuster does not rent pornography because it is a BUSINESS DECISION. It's not censorship, it's merely a choice made that will reflect on the company. You point out the argument about the Swimsuit Illustrated app. This is a mainstream publication. It's not just an app someone created. Removing the S.I. app would be like removing S.I. from Barnes & Noble or any number of films from Blockbuster that show women in bikinis. Apple is simply making an age-old business decision, and because they are just ONE company, they are NOT the government, they have every right to do that. As for entertaining this angle-- How do you think the New York Times would cover this? You think they would only show the side of the whiny-I-miss-my-boobs-app iPhone owners? There is a place and time for everything. Your employer probably does not let you surf Internet porn at work. Why not get mad at him? The point is that porn never made a point for mobility--It's best kept in one's own privacy. I understand where you are coming from, but look at this this way. You are talking about this as if it’s a violation of freedom of information–like Apple is “censoring” these things.

In reality this is just a BUSINESS DECISION. Barnes & Noble does not carry pornography because it is a BUSINESS DECISION. Blockbuster does not rent pornography because it is a BUSINESS DECISION. It’s not censorship, it’s merely a choice made that will reflect on the company.

You point out the argument about the Swimsuit Illustrated app. This is a mainstream publication. It’s not just an app someone created. Removing the S.I. app would be like removing S.I. from Barnes & Noble or any number of films from Blockbuster that show women in bikinis. Apple is simply making an age-old business decision, and because they are just ONE company, they are NOT the government, they have every right to do that.

As for entertaining this angle– How do you think the New York Times would cover this? You think they would only show the side of the whiny-I-miss-my-boobs-app iPhone owners? There is a place and time for everything. Your employer probably does not let you surf Internet porn at work. Why not get mad at him? The point is that porn never made a point for mobility–It’s best kept in one’s own privacy.

]]> Comment on iPhone sexiness by n8han http://sobsister.com/2010/02/23/iphone-debate/#comment-1194 n8han Wed, 24 Feb 2010 05:46:04 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=1009#comment-1194 I'm sympathetic to any argument against objectification, but it's easy enough to rule out the possibility that Apple can be a reliable enough judge of the objectifying qualities of a piece of software to be entrusted with banning it. That isn't something we would accept in any other medium, certainly not without due process and with the ultimate power vested in an unaccountable corporation. Yes, this genre of software is juvenile and mostly *bad for society*, but we can only continue to fight that from the trenches; we certainly can not put our faith in the enlightened dictatorship of an old boy like Phil Schiller. His indulgence of the S.I. app reveals the depth of his 'objectification' concerns very plainly. And no I don't think entertaining this angle is necessary to round out the story, but mindfully rejecting it is a useful exercise. I’m sympathetic to any argument against objectification, but it’s easy enough to rule out the possibility that Apple can be a reliable enough judge of the objectifying qualities of a piece of software to be entrusted with banning it. That isn’t something we would accept in any other medium, certainly not without due process and with the ultimate power vested in an unaccountable corporation. Yes, this genre of software is juvenile and mostly *bad for society*, but we can only continue to fight that from the trenches; we certainly can not put our faith in the enlightened dictatorship of an old boy like Phil Schiller. His indulgence of the S.I. app reveals the depth of his ‘objectification’ concerns very plainly.

And no I don’t think entertaining this angle is necessary to round out the story, but mindfully rejecting it is a useful exercise.

]]> Comment on Social butter by V http://sobsister.com/2010/02/05/social-butter/#comment-1193 V Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:28:46 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=985#comment-1193 What exactly are you trying to butt er up here? What exactly are you trying to butt er up here?

]]> Comment on BEEtnik Buzz by Ramin http://sobsister.com/2010/02/10/beetnik-buzz/#comment-1190 Ramin Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:46:15 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=1001#comment-1190 This picktur is sweetar than HONEY!BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ This picktur is sweetar than HONEY!BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

]]> Comment on Web site launch by Chelsey http://sobsister.com/2010/02/02/web-site-launch/#comment-1186 Chelsey Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:32:13 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=977#comment-1186 CSS 3 holla! text-shadow is pretty rad CSS 3 holla! text-shadow is pretty rad

]]> Comment on Web site launch by Matt http://sobsister.com/2010/02/02/web-site-launch/#comment-1185 Matt Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:59:16 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=977#comment-1185 Sweet website Sweet website

]]> Comment on Web site launch by John Woods http://sobsister.com/2010/02/02/web-site-launch/#comment-1184 John Woods Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:00:09 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=977#comment-1184 Hey, how did you get the shadow effect in the Twitter div? Is that some CSS 3? Hey, how did you get the shadow effect in the Twitter div? Is that some CSS 3?

]]> Comment on The Texas Student Media Printing Press by Longhorn http://sobsister.com/2009/02/12/the-texas-student-media-printing-press/#comment-1183 Longhorn Sun, 31 Jan 2010 01:14:31 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=337#comment-1183 You all are idiots. Of course they are selling the press. Media is in the shitter right now and they have no choice. These people are losing their jobs and all you care about is a hunk of metal. TSM revenue is struggling hard and profits from the sale of the press could help sustain the organization for a bit. Maybe help it survive a bit longer until the economy heels. PEOPLE > METAL. And no one is sucking up 6 figures right now. No one. You all are idiots. Of course they are selling the press. Media is in the shitter right now and they have no choice. These people are losing their jobs and all you care about is a hunk of metal. TSM revenue is struggling hard and profits from the sale of the press could help sustain the organization for a bit. Maybe help it survive a bit longer until the economy heels. PEOPLE > METAL. And no one is sucking up 6 figures right now. No one.

]]> Comment on Due to the holiday, we close at 8 PM by Twitter Trackbacks for Due to the holiday, we close at 8 PM : [sobsister.com] on Topsy.com http://sobsister.com/2009/05/25/due-to-the-holiday-we-close-at-8-pm/#comment-1182 Twitter Trackbacks for Due to the holiday, we close at 8 PM : [sobsister.com] on Topsy.com Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:29:59 +0000 http://sobsister.com/?p=601#comment-1182 [...] Due to the holiday, we close at 8 PM : sobsister.com/2009/05/25/due-to-the-holiday-we-close-at-8-pm – view page – cached “I don’t think I can get into that lane,” she said with her blinker on and her head rotating around her right shoulder. “These cars just keep coming and won’t let me in.” “Can’t we just tell them who you are?” [...] [...] Due to the holiday, we close at 8 PM : sobsister.com/2009/05/25/due-to-the-holiday-we-close-at-8-pm – view page – cached “I don’t think I can get into that lane,” she said with her blinker on and her head rotating around her right shoulder. “These cars just keep coming and won’t let me in.” “Can’t we just tell them who you are?” [...]

]]>