Hacker News Reader

Comment by jayliew | Hacker News Reader

It's definitely cringe-worthy that all the graphics are not replicated in ASCII art to support command-line only browsers. How insensitive! With lower-resolution ASCII-art, the models can be made to look more gender neutral, IMHO.

View on HN

I feel like I've seen more gender-obvious ascii art than other kinds of ascii art

Upon further thought, I propose a new HTTP header sent from browsers to the web servers:

1) the gender the end-user identifies with, or lack thereof

2) the end-user's sexual partner preference, or lack thereof

With this HTTP header info, the web server can then display the most politically correct ASCII image, plus the most optimal sales conversion rate for this product #win-win

Time to make a IETF RFC

Headers? Protocols? Today we create JavaScript DOM APIs for this kind of stuff. A general all-purpose API to collect, persist and negotiate user preferences... WebPreferences sounds about right. /s

> A general all-purpose API to collect, persist and negotiate user preferences

I thought that one was called Facebook.

Prefix all these headers with swj_ or sjw- :)

I hate this website so much.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm talking about all these comments on HN thinking they're hilarious by making fun of "political correctness" or "SJWs" or whatever the vogue thing for self-styled obnoxious individuals to make fun of is.

The keypad website is amusing.

Life gets better when you realize that on any polar issue, both side will have vocal extremist idiots and it can be amusing to poke fun at the whole lot of them, regardless of one's personal position.

I don't think "politically correct" means what you think it means. Your use in this context doesn't make sense (e.g. a person's preferred sexual partner is not a matter of "political correctness," nor is their gender identity).

Would you please not post flamebait to HN? We have enough trouble without it, and like most attempts to be funny, this is not as funny as it thinks it is.

sorry about that; honestly not flame-baiting. I do generally think that better ad targeting means, well, an advertising copy that is more relevant to the actual end-user. As opposed to sending a totally irrelevant and wrongly targeted and offensive message to the wrong person. But I also do think the issue is around the balancing of privacy needs--and that's a tricky balancing act. TLDR: not trying to flame-bait, but I can see how it might have come across as such

Reply on news.ycombinator.com