SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Andrew Marantz has an interesting read in The New Yorker about Lulu, a mobile app already downloaded five million times that allows female users of Facebook to make positive and negative evaluations of male users on the basis of their romantic, personal, and sexual appeal. Lulu is rigidly heteronormative—only women can rate men—and women tend to use Lulu the way someone investigating a potential mate a generation ago might have sought out the town busybody.
“It’s one of these rare products that evokes only strong reactions,” says Sam Altman. “No one feels ambivalent about it.” To rate a man on Lulu, a woman selects from a battery of pre-written hashtags—some positive (#LifeOfTheParty, #DoesDishes), some negative (#Boring, #DeathBreath), and some ambiguous (#DrivesMeCrazy, #CharmedMyPantsOff, #PlaysDidgeridoo). Those responses are distilled into a harshly precise numerical score. Alexandra Chong calls her startup “a community where women can talk honestly about what matters to them.” Others have called it Yelp for men. “Of course people on Lulu talk about sex,” says Chong. “Sex is part of what women talk about.”
A man must grant his permission for a Lulu profile to be created on his behalf, and, perhaps surprisingly, most men consent, says Chong. “We try to tell men, ‘Women on Lulu are building men up, not just tearing them down.'” Many women use Lulu for caveat-emptor purposes, such as managing expectations before a date. “One guy I went out with had a lot of hashtags like #OneTrackMind," says Sarah Burns, "so I dressed conservatively, didn’t drink too much—I tried to send the message, I’m not going home with you tonight. Which I didn’t.”
(Score: 5, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday April 29 2015, @01:47PM
So that's apparently a bad thing, but she still goes out on a date with him instead of with the many other suitors gladly throwing themselves at their feet. Sheesh. Women logic.
And now some related dating advice from my Female alter-ego Ethanola-fueled:
Sounds like sage advice.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:21PM
Personally, I prefer a rosemary advice to a salvia off. (or ethanola) one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:06PM
Sounds like a woman I would avoid.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @09:47PM
Sounds like Ethanol-fueled has an armpit fetish
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:04AM
She dated him cuz he's a "fixer-upper".
You always need to present yourself with some character trait that needs some fixing, that only the right woman will be able to fix.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @01:48PM
Stop... just... stop.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:57PM
We need a Hugh Pickens filter, like an RSS feed that doesn't have articles from this contributor.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:28PM
Then make one yourself. This is a sight filled with tech people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:31PM
> Then make one yourself. This is a sight filled with tech people.
Nah. Its better to whine in public. The goal isn't to filter, it is to express tribal identification with all the others who can't stand the fact that soylentnews is people. rah rah we are so much more superior than those who think differently from us!!!
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Wednesday April 29 2015, @10:54PM
This is a sight filled with tech people.
Noooo!!! This is a cite filed by tech persons. BTFY!
(Score: 2) by khchung on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:39PM
I, for one, have wished for a submitter filter for a long time.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:32PM
I started trying to contribute a steady stream of articles after LamX raised a flag weeks ago, and I've been paying attention to the number of posts each sort attracts (and also articles submitted by others). The pure science articles attract maybe a dozen posts, tops. New gadgets or services do better, maybe two dozen. Quasi-political/societal/controversial consistently top two score to 50+. The highest conversation generators seem to be controversial tech articles, such as about systemd. But those don't come with enough frequency to constitute the entire story line-up in a 24-hour period, so the other sorts must fill in. Articles like these do attract discussion. Like it or not, admit it or not, folks, that though this is a technical audience it still loves to gossip, kvetch, and invey as much as any other.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by goodie on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:35PM
This is why it would be nice for some of the staff to do or give access to some willing (hear, hear! I've talked about this before, I'd love to do that) to do some rudimentary analysis of the data generated by SN's users.
We could then have an idea as to the representation of articles, number of posts they generate, the depth of threads etc. These are purely trivial questions, easy to answer if somebody had the time to create a couple of queries/views on the DB so report some metrics at regular intervals. I've got a bunch of ideas on this that could help us see where we're going and what direction SN is taking. Not that we'd necessarily want to take corrective action but it may explain some people's preference to post on certain topics and not others for example.
From there, we could build cliques of users and if we were really anal, try to see whether some people are modding one another up. Ok that's going too far. But anyway the point is that we're sitting on a pile of data and we're not really using it as far as I know. There could be some interesting stats to pull up.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Thursday April 30 2015, @02:05PM
I think that would be worth doing, too. I haven't plotted them out as data points because ironing out subjectivity in how an article is tagged/classified would seem necessary to avoid massaging classification to suit a pre-conceived narrative; that is, is an article about Congress considering a law to ban drones "News," "Techonomics," "Hardware," or "Security?"
As far as getting that data, you don't need to get any special access from SN staff to get it. Start a running tally now, let it roll for a month or so (or however long to achieve the level of confidence you're going for), and then plot & analyze. It seems like there would be some insights just from doing that. If you needed more that isn't viewable on the site, I'm sure you could hop on one of the IRC channels and ask for it.
That aside, I've tried to make it a morning ritual to find 4-6 articles SN might be interested in. I do try to avoid clickbait stuff (I will *not* submit anything about Bruce Jenner), but apart from that it's pretty much catch-as-catch-can. Some days there's lots and lots and you throw them into the hopper to maybe roll out over the next 72 hours. Some weeks it runs thin--this week has been one of those so far. From talking to the guys on IRC and my own observation, Friday through Sunday is slow. Personally I think we should start a Friday feature for the DIY'ers in the community to talk about their weekend projects, post pics, ask for advice, etc. I could see everything from RPi to woodworking to homebrew fitting nicely into that slot.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Touché) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:59PM
Yeah, I can remember when technology news was about technology. Those were the days.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:15PM
Just because I don't comment on an article, doesn't mean I don't want to read it. I'd be sad if the site switched exclusively to "conversation-generator" social and controversy type articles. I'd be equally sad if it went to pure tech. I like the current mix.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @10:22PM
Half the point of the nerd news is just to scare away the non-nerds. I want to discuss politics with nerds, so scaring away the non-nerds is important. About 85% nerdy stuff ought to do the job.
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Wednesday April 29 2015, @11:40PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:41PM
What's wrong? It's mostly quotes from the article.
Although I heard about Lulu a few months ago.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:14PM
It is the second obvious gender click-baiting article in 24 hours. Lets some outrage, that will generate some clicks!
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by fleg on Thursday April 30 2015, @02:18AM
but surely click-baiting is only useful if you're getting paid for clicks? and i dont see that happening here (soylentnews).
just for the record, i think the editors do a fine job.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday April 30 2015, @04:27PM
I assume he uses this as a marketing platform for his own blog, but I have no idea if he has ads, because I would rather stab my eyes out than read it. I, too, think the Editors are doing a good job here, they just accept way too many Hugh Pickens stories. Also, if you look at Pickens original submissions, they are usually one giant run-on paragraph. The editors are doing him a giant favor in actually reading and fixing his submissions. I wish they would just reject them outright.
If I had a way to block Hugh Pickens, I would stop bitching about him on every story.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01 2015, @02:34AM
> If I had a way to block Hugh Pickens,
His name is AT THE TOP OF EVERY FUCKING ARTICLE!
Just fucking ignore them!
HOW FUCKING HARD IS THAT?
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @03:26AM
It is the second obvious gender click-baiting article in 24 hours. Lets some outrage, that will generate some clicks!
Maybe you should submit something nitehawk. I'm seeing two total from you.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday April 30 2015, @04:29PM
I would rather see far less stories per day then have terrible submissions accepted just to fill some sort of quota. If Soylent dries up without the submissions of one person. then I guess it is time for it to die.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:28PM
..And if everyone has that attitude, then so it will.. SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop [soylentnews.org].
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anne Nonymous on Wednesday April 29 2015, @01:51PM
> a community where women can talk honestly about what matters to them.
> #PlaysDidgeridoo
I had no idea.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:13PM
I'm curious if that is a good or bad thing. Maybe it's a sophistication thing?
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:28PM
I guess that depends on whether you like Didgeridoo music. And of course on whether he's good at it. After all, the tag isn't "#PlaysDidgeridooWell"!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:31PM
I have read this several times in a row and it never stops being funny.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by romlok on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:38PM
I assumed it was a euphemism.
(Score: 3, Funny) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:23PM
I assumed it was a euphemism.
In context it didn't sound universally bad or good but depends on the individual woman.
Playing the instrument involves men putting a phallic shape up to their lips. So I guess chix who like MMF 3somes would in some transitive fashion like a dude who can really give a digeridoo a good tongue lashing because it would please the other M in the MMF, but the vast majority who aren't into MMF would not find it appealing and even girls who are into MMF are not going to find M-M action interesting, unless they just like to watch. So that kinda fits in context.
Another interpretation is the players do some weird stuff with puffy flabby cheeks to make their faces into human bagpipes to play continuously. I have absolutely no idea how that could be good or bad and trust me I've seen a lot of pr0n and have an excellent imagination, so I'm thinking this isn't the correct interpretation. It could be some weird extended analogy where he likes puffy flabby stretched out cheeks which flows from face cheeks to posterior cheeks which converts from playing a musical instrument to he likes women with giant rear ends, which I guess could be seen as good or bad by various women depending on their personal size back there.
Being a loud and obnoxious phallic shaped musical instrument maybe it means he's really loud in bed, which I guess could be a positive or negative.
The only other euphemism I can think of its a Fing annoying and obnoxious noise generator of a musical instrument, which probably doesn't have any positive connotation at all.
For the good of science we must figure this out. Its eating away at me, not knowing WTF this nonsense means. Perhaps EthanolFueled can ask EthanolaFueled for us.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Flyingmoose on Wednesday April 29 2015, @08:19PM
I think it's more of a hipster thing. You sure think about penises a lot though.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @08:42PM
Well they started it with the freaking didgeridoo, I can't help what the thing looks like.
If they had #spelunker or #cavernExplorer @tourOfTheGrandCanyon then we'd be talking about girlie fun-parts to be on topic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @02:48AM
The vaginal canal is a pipe too. You can try to rationalize your obsession with phalluses all you want, but its still pretty gay to see dicks everywhere and in everything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @08:45AM
Anonymous Coward confirms it: Internet is gay.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday April 30 2015, @03:19PM
"Don't you ever have to breath?"
"It's called circular breathing." Replied Deborah. "The Australian Aboriginals developed it to play their didgeridoos, it means they can keep blowing forever. All New York Jewish girls are taught it, that's how we get to marry such rich men."
-- Gridlock, by Ben Elton.
(Score: 2) by The Archon V2.0 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:25PM
BRB looking into sexual applications of circular breathing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @12:33AM
You could spit-shine the pearl for hours if you didn't have to come up for air.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @03:40AM
Gave it up. If she won't polish my rod I will not polish her pearl.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:53AM
I never really understood this sort of thinking - similar to the "have to come up for air when kissing". Do people not know how to use their nose, or what? I mean our faces come equipped, standard, with a double-barreled orifice optimized specifically for breathing, even when our mouths are otherwise occupied - does nobody read the owner's manual?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:36PM
Actually, he probably doesn't snore.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by splodus on Wednesday April 29 2015, @01:59PM
If this sort of thing takes of;
1. If you don't 'opt in', the assumption will be that there's something about you that you want to hide.
2. One or two unfortunate incidences (transport trouble, lost your wallet, cancel a date due to illness) could leave you with a poor rating.
3. If you don't 'date' lots of different people (to dilute the bad reviews), then a couple of bad ratings may well dissuade someone from meeting you who would otherwise find you good company.
4. Those who are good at manipulating first dates will garner more good reviews than those who are socially awkward meeting the first time; doesn't take into account what people are like when you get to know them.
5. Anyone that dates someone with lots of 'supportive' girlfriends may find themselves getting bad reviews from people they've never met.
6. If someone is getting lots of really good ratings (and is therefore someone most people would like to date), why are they wanting to date yet another person? (Ok if you're only interested in one night stands, I suppose...)
7. I can't really see an upside to this at all... Perhaps I've misunderstood it. Maybe I should get create a FB account with a girl's name and join so I can see what this all about. Oh wait - how do we know that half those 5 million users aren't actually men doing just that?
(Score: 2) by tibman on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:11PM
Well, if they are men then those dates could get awkward (or interesting).
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 4, Touché) by c0lo on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:25PM
My guess? In the erection and/or stiffened nipples, if/when it happens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:37PM
As ever in this world. The part I have replaced with dots was not needed.
(Score: 2) by splodus on Wednesday April 29 2015, @11:56PM
One day, perhaps, there will be an app, or a social network site, that caters for people who struggle with the 'dating'. It's not just boys - there are plenty of girls that struggle with the way things are.
I read a book once, I think it was 'Microserfs' - Douglas Coupland. One of the characters corresponded with someone on line, and over time they fell in love. Subsequently they arranged to meet - he didn't know if the person he'd fallen for was male of female, young or old. He didn't care.
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a place to go, anonymous, declare your gender or not, offer your geographical location perhaps (because it makes sense if you hope to meet at some point). But to know that everyone there was looking for someone, for a partner, or just a friend. No pressure, no societal rules, no judgement based on appearance, no need to 'perform' in the social arena.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by scruffybeard on Thursday April 30 2015, @03:17PM
One upside is that it might filter out women who are shallow enough to dismiss a date with me because some other anonymous person tagged me as #Boring or #DrivesMeCrazy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01 2015, @01:47AM
One upside is knowing how to avoid a lot of desperate shallow people.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:07PM
So they are trying to generate a bit of outrageous buzz about an app which allows women to rate men. This threatens men causing a backlash. Forums and social media will fill with flame wars.
Meanwhile the app creators laugh all the way to the bank. The only winning move is not to play.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:27PM
FTFY
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Noble713 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:11PM
For some reason, I'm pretty sure a reverse of this app (where men and only men can rate women) would be lambasted as terribly sexist. I'd be surprised if any women would volunteer to have profiles created.
#FirstDateSex (is that a pro or a con? depends on the guy I guess....)
#Cooks&Cleans
#Swallows
#TitsAreReal
#GoldDigger
#VillageBicycle
#Airhead
I live on an island in Asia with a medium-sized population (~1mil) and have a LOT of players in my social network. The sexual histories of the women here would probably appall most of the "nice guys" they pretend they want to date, especially as the women age. It's normal to check a girls "HoeFax" by showing pictures of her to guys you know. Hell, it's practically mandatory for any female over the age of 22-ish, especially if she speaks English.
(Score: 5, Funny) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:17PM
Okay, I am packing my bags and pissed on my bosses desk this morning. Now, where is this island of paradise you speak of?
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:45PM
LOL!!
Bonus points if the boss is sitting at his desk at the time. ;-)
Why burn a bridge when you can nuke it!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:34PM
To be fair his boss was packing his own bags at the time of the incident.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Noble713 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:46PM
Okinawa, Japan.
Honestly, if you are going to move to Asia for the women, there are FAR better places to go than here. Tokyo, Seoul, Osaka, Hong Kong, Hell even Thailand and the Philippines. Come to Okinawa for the surfing and scuba diving, but not the women.
I find mainland Japanese women are much better educated, more open-minded, slightly more rational (they are still women, after all), but more materialistic. A lot of guys love it here but I'm not a huge fan of hip-hop culture-fetish clubrats and 30+ year old "leftover" women who have banged half the Marine Corps and Air Force.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:40PM
They must still be working on the rest. As an aside, my grandmother was from Okinawa, she was pretty awesome.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:02PM
Umm.. Phrasing?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @08:09PM
She was awesome for me too.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:18PM
Japan is one such. Millions of girls in their 20's and 30's who get to leave work at 5:30 while their male peers are expected to slave away until 9:30 and then go out drinking with the guys. The girls, having a 4 hour headstart on the men, are pretty much ready to hook up by 9pm. If you are non-Japanese, especially with blond hair and blue eyes, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Be aware, though, that the window of opportunity pretty much closes by age 35. If you're older than that, you're just "tskebe" (creepy, lecherous).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:06PM
Noble713 are you a girl? Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Your list sounds like something very interesting to older men not the youth the original app is targeting. I was young once and the "hot or not" website more accurately reflects typical young man behavior than being interested in "cooks and cleans" (unless cooks and cleans is some kind of sex thing I am too sleepy to figure out right now... maybe it means "cooks and cleans while nude" or "bend her over the kitchen table" I could get into that)
This beings up an interesting problem with the original app that young girls are not very good at mate selection. Back when I worked in a field with a reasonable balance of women (retail, 20 years ago) the chicks all seemed to end up in absolute train wrecks sooner or later. Teen pregnancy, criminals, high school dropouts, one chick got beaten a bit, it was just a train wreck across the whole culture. A couple girls escaped without screwing up, but most young girls are pretty awful at mate selection. If young men select mates primarily by T+A criteria, it almost seems to work better than WTF the young women were using as a selection criteria. Anyway that's all build up to older women are probably better at providing advice to young women than other inexperienced young women. Three dumb girls aren't going to do anything smarter than one dumb girl can do while alone, outside of filming pr0n I guess. However a wise older woman who doesn't have the authoritarian parental figure negative might actually be a useful matchmaker. So you'll get older women giving advice like "this one went to prison after killing his last girlfriend in a drunken fight over getting another girl pregnant, so I know I'm an old fuddy duddy but probably not a good idea" rather than the insightful notes from young chicks like "plays digeridoo" or WTF from the article. Its right up there in logical fallacies with getting a team of nine women together to give birth to a full term baby in one month. Its just not going to be useful actionable information.
TLDR is I'm just saying it'll never sell to men because (young) men just want the T+A winner on "hot or not" and it won't be useful to (young) women because a team of twenty dumb girls isn't any smarter than one dumb girl acting alone.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:22PM
Three dumb girls aren't going to do anything smarter than one dumb girl can do while alone
A few relevant posters:
http://www.despair.com/meetings.html [despair.com]
http://www.despair.com/idiocy.html [despair.com]
http://www.despair.com/collaboration.html [despair.com]
(Score: 1) by Noble713 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:40PM
Noble713 are you a girl? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Your list sounds like something very interesting to older men not the youth the original app is targeting. I was young once and the "hot or not" website more accurately reflects typical young man behavior than being interested in "cooks and cleans"
I'm a 32yo unmarried male. I mostly date 19-22yo's locally, but 25+yo's from the mainland (they tend to have their own apartments, so when I travel to the mainland I can stay at their place, saves on hotel expenses). I enjoy cooking but hate washing dishes, so I have a standing rule of "If you come to my place, you wash the dishes." Sometimes they will go and clean my entire apartment of their own volition. I consider it a demonstration of their affection and satisfaction. Any female can drain your testicles but only a good, selfless one will fold up all of your laundry.
Anyway that's all build up to older women are probably better at providing advice to young women than other inexperienced young women. Three dumb girls aren't going to do anything smarter than one dumb girl can do while alone,
You touch on an important point about social/family structures and the influence of social media in the modern age. Women are getting too much of their "advice" from questionable and inexperienced sources such as their peers, the Internet, pop stars, etc.
I'm just saying it'll never sell to men because (young) men just want the T+A winner on "hot or not" and it won't be useful to (young) women because a team of twenty dumb girls isn't any smarter than one dumb girl acting alone.
1. The concept could appeal to young men who also screen women for sexual skills/interests/history/STDs etc. Even young, desperate men tighten up their standards in the face of amplifying information (do you want the hot 20yo rated #Inexperienced by 2 guys or the hot 20yo rated #CavernousVagina by 35 guys?).
2. Agreed re: young dumb girls. Sadly.....the young dumb girls don't realize this, so they'll still use the app anyway.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:17PM
getting too much of their "advice" from questionable and inexperienced sources such as their peers, the Internet, pop stars
An interesting old person observation is the linear decline in usefullness and/or IQ in online advice.
In the old days in 80s BBS and usenet and very early 90s usenet you actually got good advice from the "social media" of the day. Compuserv forums had fairly intelligent participants in '83 ish timeframe. Even the dumbest BBS warez kiddies in the late 80s were actually pretty smart even if sometimes somewhat socially retarded.
Since then its been linear downward decline to almost sub-television level of intelligence such as the articles #Digeridoo social media app.
This trend must stop some day... otherwise in 20 years the internet social media of that day will primarily be used by dogs sniffing each others butts and similar level of intelligence. I mean, its gotta stop, doesn't it? Is idiocracy inevitable? So far, yes, unfortunately. But at some point the race to the bottom has to stop when houseplants can't figure out how to click "Submit" or something?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:51PM
And there's that usual sexism, where women who enjoy sex are nothing but dirty, filthy whores who should be ridiculed and shamed, but left unsaid is the similar disgust for the men that are banging all of these women (if every woman has banged every man on the island, then every man has banged every woman on the island). A slut is a slut, regardless of gender. You do not get to condemn one gender of sluts alone, or condemn one while praising the other. If sluts disgust you, then all sluts must disgust you, otherwise you're just another dumbass misogynist.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:54PM
If you don't like it use a different hashtag like #SexuallyExperienced
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:38PM
every woman on the island
has a typo, by old people standards
every woman on the island that weekend
Its impossible to study the present without studying the past and in the 80s/90s that term almost exclusively (to males) meant she was doing multiple guys per day or per weekend at least. It had nothing to do with if she enjoyed it. So the problem isn't that she enjoyed it or she did it with you on your first date on Sunday afternoon, the problem is she also did some dude saturday night and yet another dude friday night. Thus the disgust makes sense, unless you enjoy disease and strange burning sensations when you pee. The chicks of that era used the same term to complain about fellow chicks that did things in bed they didn't like, such as swallow or "going to fast" on the first date or he talked her into wearing a harry potter costume while they did it or whatever. They also didn't care if she enjoyed it (although presumably she was at least not forced to participate?) or if she swallowed one guy or twenty that weekend, all they cared is someone is contaminating her carefully standardized (well, standardized by her standards) supply/demand marketplace. So if she doesn't like D+D cosplay but gossip is some other chick really likes it, then she's going to be pretty pissed off at that other chick for encouraging her boyfriend to pester her endlessly to wear the full chainmail and wizard hat outfit or whatever.
Today among young people it seems to mean something totally different, like it should have a completely different word attached. Meaning something like she enjoys it or is not passive. In the old days that would have meant she was "normal" or "not frigid" but apparently its a badge of shame to have fun in the 2010s which is really weird and a shame. And in an era of universal condom use and AIDS nobody seems to care one way or another if someone does it with two people per day or per weekend or twenty, I mean thats what condoms are for right?
So there's at least three separate and unrelated definitions of the same term, what us guys meant in the 80s, what other women meant in the 80s, and WTF people are trying to say in 2010, all using the same word.
So that is an interesting aspect of app design. MILF age chicks and young hotties are not going to be able to use the same app and same social media because they're just not going to be able to understand each other, two cultures separated by a common language, like US and UK.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @10:10PM
Actually, I would care. Call me weird but, if she's doing 20 over the weekend (or even just two) I would be worried about more than just the STDs that I might get exposed to. If she's doing 2 to 20 guys over the weekend, she is not your girlfriend, she's your hooker. Of course, if that's what you are into...well to each his own, I guess. Personally, I want something more in my relationship with a woman than a connection that is exclusively below the waist. Yeah, I know; I'm probably an old-fashioned fossil.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @12:28AM
And if a man is doing 2 to 20 girls over the weekend, he's a playa! High five dawg! The only thing more important to guys than dick size is how many women that dick has been in. And this is somehow seen as a good thing?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @08:54AM
If you think that attitude is as universal as your comment suggests, then you need to get out and talk to some real people, and not just those in rap videos.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:00PM
"I'd be surprised if any women would volunteer to have profiles created."
exactly. only men are stupid enough to opt into this crap. there's a reason why the ancients made women subservient to men. it creates balance and order. we men are women's lap-dogs no matter what.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @12:40AM
Like it or not, pussy will always control the world. Its genetics. Objectively, the entire point of being alive is to pass on your genes, and the women are the ones with control over that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:36PM
I seem to recall that this was the initial premise of Facebook. Can anyone confirm this or is my memory faulty? But I do take your point: if an app were created today where men, and only men, could rate women the creator would be hounded off the interwebs for eternity. The mental gymnastics that women will need to go through to justify this are going to be astounding, I'm sure.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:42PM
The whole concept has "gender-war flamebait" written all over it, but also "legal minefield". Doesn't anyone else remember when it was a given that "All girls on the internet are men"?
How exactly do they enforce their "no guys" rule? Will they send someone round to check the contents of my underwear if I attempt to sign up? Are you supposed to validate yourself via a credit card or Facebook or something? Email in a photo of your tits? Will they accept people who identify as female but are still biologically male? Can't wait to see all the LBGT folks start picking holes in that policy.
Basically, if a guy can get an account on this stupid site (and I doubt it's difficult, at worst you just have to persuade/pay a friendly female to sign up on your behalf) then it opens it up to all kinds of abuses. He could use the fake female account to open a profile on his real male self, flag himself #TotallyNotACreepyRapist and away he goes. In fact I predict that within weeks (if not already) the site owners will be playing fake-account whack-a-mole against communities of male-owned fake profiles all fraudulently rating one another favourably in an attempt to game the system and get laid. Who's going to accept responsibility when that all goes horribly wrong?
Also, I can't wait to see what happens when guys start having profiles opened about them without their consent (it will happen, despite what they say). I expect words like "Defamation" and "Slander" will be used. In court.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:56PM
From the summary, emphasis by me:
a mobile app [...] that allows female users of Facebook to [...]
So yes, you are obviously supposed to validate yourself via Facebook.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:19PM
AH, OK, thanks.
And of course, it's completely impossible for a man to set up a fake female facebook account.
This is dangerous. Women will put faith in this app, they'll abdicate their own judgement to some random stranger on this app and get burned by people abusing the system. Baaaaaaad idea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:34PM
> And of course, it's completely impossible for a man to set up a fake female facebook account.
Of course not. But your black and white analysis ignores the grey which is where all the important stuff resides.
Think of it like Amazon. Yes there are fake reviews on amazon, it is impossible for Amazon to eradicate them completely. But most fake reviews are obvious. It takes a lot of work to create multiple believable reviews. A guy on lulu who has ratings by a bunch of 'women' with low-content profiles is going to be suspicious. And all it takes is one bad review from an obvious real woman to screw up whatever plausibility there was before. And then what is he going to do? Abandon his facebook account and create a new one? That won't look suspicious.
Online social networks mimic real world social networks for things like reputation. In real life you can't blindly trust gossip either, but that doesn't make it completely useless, it just means you have to be smart about how you use it.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:19PM
> But most fake reviews are obvious.
Are they? How can you be sure?
> It takes a lot of work to create multiple believable reviews.
I suspect you underestimate the amount of work a man is prepared to invest to get laid. More than they are generally prepared to invest in misleading amazon customers, certainly.
> And all it takes is one bad review from an obvious real woman to screw up whatever plausibility there was before. And then what is he going to do?
If it's that easy to destroy a guy then expect bitter, shunned men with fake accounts to grief the system by shitting all over the profiles of genuinely popular men, damaging the system's credibility and pissing users off. You could probably work in some kind of meta-moderation and appeals process to mitigate this abuse, but I'm not sure the target demographic really wants to get that involved - they just want to tag a photo with a few remarks and move on.
> And then what is he going to do? Abandon his facebook account and create a new one? That won't look suspicious.
More likely he'll maintain two accounts - a "real" one with his friends and family on it, and a "playa" (ugh) account, with a bunch of male and fake-female friends on it to make it look convincing. Maybe even fake parents. If it gets bad reviews, just burn it and start again. He can recreate the network of fake friends easily enough, because it is made up of other guys like him all pulling the same scam on a reciprocal basis. Properly organised, I can see the system being quite easy to maintain.
> it just means you have to be smart about how you use it.
And here we run into the problem. We all know that plenty of people are all too willing to switch their brains off and blindly do what their computers tell them, like driving off a cliff by satnav. Do we just let Darwin sort 'em out?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:24PM
This looks like the synopsis of a movie script you are pitching. Perhaps a romantic comedy?
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:07PM
> Perhaps a romantic comedy?
You joke, but I always thought Sleepless in Seattle (regarded by many people as the height of romance, apparently) should have been called "it's OK to be a stalker if you're as hot as Meg Ryan"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:28PM
And here we run into the problem. We all know that plenty of people are all too willing to switch their brains off and blindly do what their computers tell them, like driving off a cliff by satnav.
You are so caught up in your false narrative that you don't even realize it when your own citation disproves it.
The number of people who use satnav is in the hundreds of millions. The number of people who abrogate all judgement to their satnav and get into trouble is so small that whenever it happens it makes the news. Break yourself out of this black and white thinking where a minority of outliers cancels out the overwhelming common case. Grow.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:10PM
And you're so busy cherry picking the points you want to address and guiding the argument down an ever narrower path that you fail to acknowledge all the reasons that this app is a disaster waiting to happen. You grow.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:51PM
I have made a fake Facebook account before. I don't know how aggressive Facebook is in deleting fake accounts, but it's better than nothing.
Any online review system should be taken with a grain of salt. Look for "high reputation" reviewers if they exist, or look at multiple reviews. It's almost always better to have the resource than not have it.
(Score: 5, Touché) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:18PM
And who wants to be judged on the opinions of their exes? Just in general.
Even honest ratings will be a measure of number of clean breaks to messy breaks, which doesn't necessarily say anything meaningful.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:05PM
If you're a reasonably decent human being, there's more upside than downside there.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:24PM
I'd love to think I'm a reasonably decent human being, but I do not want my private life publicly tracked by other people.
Not that it matters, but I have exactly zero bad breaks in my own history; I've just seen enough people break up on bad terms to know it has little to do with who they are. Like that person who decided they hated the entire state of California because their ex moved there. It's not rational.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Archon V2.0 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:46PM
> I do not want my private life publicly tracked by other people.
Not being on Facebook seems a good start to that.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:49PM
You mean: "If the ex is a reasonably decent human being..."
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:32PM
Can't wait to see all the LBGT folks start picking holes in that policy.
Bad choice of words here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:02PM
I'm a poop-licking rump ranger, and me and my gay brothers have as much right to rate cute men as those breeder bitches!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:37PM
Want to see the real discrimination? If someone that didn't claim to be homosexual said half of what is in your post, it would never stay at zero or better moderation and there would be a dozen responses against it. Those posts would be tirades of accusations filled with the most intentionally harmful language the posters could come up with.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:53PM
it could be real [urbandictionary.com]
(Score: 2) by zugedneb on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:18PM
...and guy does not like him, he gets rated shit.
Bitter woman goes and spreads shit about guy who does not like her,
Honestly, I can imagine, that if the mood is not the best, the woman's wish to be a victim, to be "the one who have experienced it" will take over, and she will mostly shitpost...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:56PM
That happened before Lulu and it will happen after Lulu.
Shit posting on Lulu is better than a rape allegation...
(Score: 5, Touché) by Hartree on Wednesday April 29 2015, @04:59PM
"No one feels ambivalent about it."
You misunderestimate the level of my apathy.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:37PM
I, for one, just don't give a shit. (while not being apathetic, just busy)
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:38PM
Others have called it Yelp for men.
Whoa didn't notice that till now.
So they let you pay money to "fix" public reviews? Cool!
Yelp has an, uh, reputation among people who know it well and its kind of different from the casuals. Its basically an extortion racket automation system.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday April 29 2015, @07:59PM
"Reputation" ?
They got sued because they were doing it, told the judge that it was their right, and won.
It's not a "reputation" when it's a big piece of your business plan.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 29 2015, @08:36PM
The general public is dumb enough to think its something other than an extortion racket. An unfair positive reputation, I guess.
Its a toxic meme though... anyone who hears it instantly stops paying any attention to any thing positive or negative on yelp, or social recommendations in general. You can generally assume anything on a facebook page is bullshit too, for example.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Archon V2.0 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:48PM
It clearly fails the Bechdel test.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 29 2015, @06:26PM
Thursday: Consumer Guide to Men at MIT
Original article with last names blurred out,
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/guide-mit-men [thesmokinggun.com]
A short version of the back story, Thursday was the "alternative' campus newspaper,
http://museum.mit.edu/nom150/entries/1243 [mit.edu]
I was in Boston/Cambridge when this was done, it made the local papers and later some of the national news magazines too.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @03:27AM
I do.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.