/me quickly skims the comment

Awesome! NASA invented a warp drive!!!

They'll step out of their spacecraft and inform us that our newly invented warp drive was invented 324,123 years ago and we cannot use it without paying the license fees of approximately 2.3 earth planets per earth year.

Otherwise we will need to wait another 14,675,877 years until it enters the public domain.

I don't see what Al Gore has to do with it.

The problem with focusing on air and water quality is CO2 only becomes a major concern in the context of climate change. You could try talking about ocean acidification which is another side effect but I don't think ignoring the elephant smashing everything in the room that is climate change is the best strategy.

It's not like she's running to captain a space station, it's the Republican Primary, they dream of finding someone qualified to manage an Arby's.

It's the Tea Party, they destroy any candidate who isn't an ideologue. The only reason Romney survived last primary was he had a crapload of money and a huge existing profile, the only two potential candidates in that position this time are Jeb Bush and Chris Christy, any other moderate candidate will get destroyed as a RINO.

Your post suggested that 12/7 could mean anything and associating it with Pearl Harbor was a stretch on the part of the reader.

By contrast the mention of a 4.16 moment to the Virginia tech community is intentional and the association obvious.

Also no one thinks that an anonymous poster is going to reproduce Pearl Harbor by carrying out an air raid on a military base. But an anonymous poster can carry out a school shooting.

It's nothing to do with being "too soon" or "free speech", it's a credible threat to carry out mass murder.

If you really think that's necessary then fine, weird them out.

But why do you have to do it in the CS class in a way the re-enforces the perception that girls aren't welcome?

A relatively normal looking friend of mine in his mid-twenties tried it out.

He came out as a woman in her 60's.

I think it's more an effect of the people we see pictures of most, celebrities, put a lot of work into appearing young, so we don't expect people in the public eye to age as quickly. Tom Cruise ages slowly because his career demands it, Barak Obama on the other hand probably looks more serious the older he looks, so there's less reason to make himself appear young.

Even compare to Jon Stewart in 2008 vs now. There doesn't seem to be a huge difference, until you realize the gallon of makeup applied to Jon Stewart's face, it's hard to appeal to GenXers and Millenials looking like you're over 50.

I'd actually be curious to see how this algorithm does with celebrity photos.

What you linked to is hardcore porn.

Playboy is softcore porn, and fairly tame softcore porn, but it's still porn.

If I'm not entitled to have others agree then why are you? Why do we have to agree that isn't not a crop from pornographic photograph, why aren't guys and girls in that class allowed to feel weirded out by the expression and made uncomfortable when they figure out the full image?

That's great you have no problem with it, but some people do, why can't you take their concerns into account?

Only if you're doing so around people who don't want to be exposed to it, I think a computer vision lab qualifies.

Cut the crap.
Of course sexual imagery in art is shocking or at least provocative, that's the point, it's one of the strongest desires we have. That's the whole bloody point unless you want to look at a painting of a fruit bowl.

I just have to disagree on that point.

No I am not.

I am saying that image, even cropped, does not belong in a high school classroom because many people find it to be objectifying.

So your argument is that because the world is a shitty place there's no problem with making it a little shittier?

And now you're arguing with a figment of your imagination...

I read the comments and the closest I saw was someone mentioning knowing female alumni who hadn't complained in the past (though I could have missed as WP has a terrible commenting system). I also saw things criticizing the article for things it never said nor implied. And finally I saw multiple posts from people completely agreeing with the article.

Again you're ascribing views and arguments I never made. And sexually liberated girls and guys can still be offended by pornography and what they perceive as sexual objectification.

It's not your job to fix them.

Even the cropped image is mildly suggestive, but the fact people will know if comes from a full nude image makes it relevant.

And many people who feel it's objectifying will be in that class, their wishes should be respected.

I'm in full agreement.

I also think we need to respect the people who don't want to see her picture as an assignment in a high school CS class.

The full Lena picture, which many of the kids will find and know they're working on, is most definitely pornographic. That carries an important context.

Why do you claim I was trying to speak on her behalf? I never attempted such a thing.

But what would you say to the girls in the class who are made offended and/or uncomfortable by the image and its origin? Do they have a right to feel uncomfortable? What's the big deal with using a different image and removing the problem?

Even if it were only the face it would still be creepy since the expression is clearly suggestive, but a lot of the kids are going to find the original and that changes the context.

This is playboy, I'd consider it professional softcore pornography.

Nudity in art regardless of age can have pornographic aspects or not.

Here I'm assuming you mean "unprofessional" as in don't bring it into the workplace. I don't know what "softcore nudity" is but softcore pornography should not be brought into the workplace. Cropping helps, I doubt having the cropped Lena photo as a desktop background would be an issue, but using it in a presentation? I'd say that's unprofessional.