Yeah, so much US content gets geoblocked here. It's super weird, just a random clip from a show on youtube? woops, looks like that content isn't available in your country.
This isn't about prudishness. No one's offended by the picture. It makes people uncomfortable because it's from a playboy. The problem is that it brings the objectification of women to the fore in a male dominated field where women often face sexual harassment and aren't taken seriously.
It's not censorship. They can choose to publish or not publish anything they want. Anyone is still free to publish the image in other journals that don't ban it.
People were surveyed about the image, there are articles about it, an entire documentary has been made about it with the support of Lenna. How you can just come along and say that's all made up is honestly beyond me. And I'm pretty sure that the collective IEEE and the ethics researchers who have written about this aren't idiots. I really think you are confused about what empathy is, but I don't see myself convincing you of that. So uh, have a nice day.
I've been registered for a while now. I really don't see a good reason not to, they only take 'em if I'm dead and what good are they to me then? Better going to someone in need.
Down the bottom there are some statistics about how many women experience sexual harassment and gender based discrimination in STEM positions. They also tend to have worse outcomes in general and fewer will go on to work in their field.
While this might seem like a small thing, ignoring these kinds of outdated and unnecessary boys club attitudes is exactly the kind of thing perpetuating these sorts of outcomes.
If you can't see how using a cropped image from a playboy for no reason in an image processing paper is different from your made up examples and could make some people feel uncomfortable then maybe you're lacking common sense and empathy.
The issue was that it did make some people uncomfortable, so it was harmful. You can't just ignore the reasons stated and then say it's pointless. The ban didn't come out of nowhere.
This is kinda interesting. I work in this field and have seen that image show up all the time in papers but never knew the origins.
I think it's the right move to ban it and I'm surprised there's so many people defending it. This isn't about censorship or being a prude or anything like that. It's just a bit weird that it's from a playboy and if you can't understand how that would make some people uncomfortable then you might be a bit lacking in empathy.
The 3d world has Utah teapots and Stanford bunnies and dragons which are all very neutral and don't hurt anyone. Perhaps we can move on and use some less alienating pictures for image processing papers, too.
So many posts perfectly summarising why I've always preferred the reddit format over twitter. On one you follow topics, on the other you follow people. I prefer to hear a wide range of views on one topic rather than one persons views on different topics.
It was one of the stories he constantly told while he was campaigning as though it's at all relevant to him as a leader. Meanwhile he's off aiding genocide.
I don't doubt it will be misused at all but we all know what happens without the censorship. The AI just ends up giving you the most racist answers it can find. There are good reasons to restrict some topics, especially since too often AI can just be misinformation and people should be getting that sort of stuff from an actual source.
Yeah, for art it's similar, you can get some really compelling results, but once tasked with creating something a bit too specific it ends up wasting your time more than anything.
There's definitely uses for it and it's really cool, but I don't think it's as close to replacing professionals as some people think.
Hold up, the guy funding a genocide against Palestine also opposes their statehood? Woah.