Vice Mocks GIFs as 'For Boomers Now, Sorry'. (And For Low-Effort Millennials) (vice.com) 227
"GIF folders were used by ancient civilisations as a way to store and catalogue animated pictures that were once employed to convey emotion," Vice writes:
Okay, you probably know what a GIF folder is — but the concept of a special folder needed to store and save GIFs is increasingly alien in an era where every messaging app has its own in-built GIF library you can access with a single tap. And to many youngsters, GIFs themselves are increasingly alien too — or at least, okay, increasingly uncool. "Who uses gifs in 2020 grandma," one Twitter user speedily responded to Taylor Swift in August that year when the singer-songwriter opted for an image of Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson mouthing the words "oh my god" to convey her excitement at reaching yet another career milestone.
You don't have to look far to find other tweets or TikToks mocking GIFs as the preserve of old people — which, yes, now means millennials. How exactly did GIFs become so embarrassing? Will they soon disappear forever, like Homer Simpson backing up into a hedge...?
Gen Z might think GIFs are beloved by millennials, but at the same time, many millennials are starting to see GIFs as a boomer plaything. And this is the first and easiest explanation as to why GIFs are losing their cultural cachet. Whitney Phillips, an assistant professor of communication at Syracuse University and author of multiple books on internet culture, says that early adopters have always grumbled when new (read: old) people start to encroach on their digital space. Memes, for example, were once subcultural and niche. When Facebook came along and made them more widespread, Redditors and 4Chan users were genuinely annoyed that people capitalised on the fruits of their posting without putting in the cultural work. "That democratisation creates a sense of disgust with people who consider themselves insiders," Phillips explains. "That's been central to the process of cultural production online for decades at this point...."
In 2016, Twitter launched its GIF search function, as did WhatsApp and iMessage. A year later, Facebook introduced its own GIF button in the comment section on the site. GIFs became not only centralised but highly commercialised, culminating in Facebook buying GIPHY for $400 million in 2020. "The more GIFs there are, maybe the less they're regarded as being special treasures or gifts that you're giving people," Phillips says. "Rather than looking far and wide to find a GIF to send you, it's clicking the search button and typing a word. The gift economy around GIFs has shifted...."
Linda Kaye, a cyberpsychology professor at Edge Hill University, hasn't done direct research in this area but theorises that the ever-growing popularity of video-sharing on TikTok means younger generations are more used to "personalised content creation", and GIFs can seem comparatively lazy.
The GIF was invented in 1987 "and it's important to note the format has already fallen out of favour and had a comeback multiple times before," the article points out. It cites Jason Eppink, an independent artist and curator who curated an exhibition on GIFs for the Museum of the Moving Image in New York in 2014, who highlighted how GIFs were popular with GeoCities users in the 90s, "so when Facebook launched, they didn't support GIFs.... They were like, 'We don't want this ugly symbol of amateur web to clutter our neat and uniform cool new website." But then GIFs had a resurgence on Tumblr.
Vice concludes that while even Eppink no longer uses GIFs any more, "Perhaps the waxing and waning popularity of the GIF is an ironic mirror of the format itself — destined to repeat endlessly, looping over and over again."
You don't have to look far to find other tweets or TikToks mocking GIFs as the preserve of old people — which, yes, now means millennials. How exactly did GIFs become so embarrassing? Will they soon disappear forever, like Homer Simpson backing up into a hedge...?
Gen Z might think GIFs are beloved by millennials, but at the same time, many millennials are starting to see GIFs as a boomer plaything. And this is the first and easiest explanation as to why GIFs are losing their cultural cachet. Whitney Phillips, an assistant professor of communication at Syracuse University and author of multiple books on internet culture, says that early adopters have always grumbled when new (read: old) people start to encroach on their digital space. Memes, for example, were once subcultural and niche. When Facebook came along and made them more widespread, Redditors and 4Chan users were genuinely annoyed that people capitalised on the fruits of their posting without putting in the cultural work. "That democratisation creates a sense of disgust with people who consider themselves insiders," Phillips explains. "That's been central to the process of cultural production online for decades at this point...."
In 2016, Twitter launched its GIF search function, as did WhatsApp and iMessage. A year later, Facebook introduced its own GIF button in the comment section on the site. GIFs became not only centralised but highly commercialised, culminating in Facebook buying GIPHY for $400 million in 2020. "The more GIFs there are, maybe the less they're regarded as being special treasures or gifts that you're giving people," Phillips says. "Rather than looking far and wide to find a GIF to send you, it's clicking the search button and typing a word. The gift economy around GIFs has shifted...."
Linda Kaye, a cyberpsychology professor at Edge Hill University, hasn't done direct research in this area but theorises that the ever-growing popularity of video-sharing on TikTok means younger generations are more used to "personalised content creation", and GIFs can seem comparatively lazy.
The GIF was invented in 1987 "and it's important to note the format has already fallen out of favour and had a comeback multiple times before," the article points out. It cites Jason Eppink, an independent artist and curator who curated an exhibition on GIFs for the Museum of the Moving Image in New York in 2014, who highlighted how GIFs were popular with GeoCities users in the 90s, "so when Facebook launched, they didn't support GIFs.... They were like, 'We don't want this ugly symbol of amateur web to clutter our neat and uniform cool new website." But then GIFs had a resurgence on Tumblr.
Vice concludes that while even Eppink no longer uses GIFs any more, "Perhaps the waxing and waning popularity of the GIF is an ironic mirror of the format itself — destined to repeat endlessly, looping over and over again."
"GIFs" are so old fashioned (Score:5, Funny)
Use "JIFs" instead.
Re: (Score:3)
Use "JIFs" instead.
But I'm allergic to peanut butter, you insensitive clod!
Re: "GIFs" are so old fashioned (Score:3)
"May contain nuts"
Lord Vetinari, the Patrician and supreme ruler of the city, took proper food labeling very seriously. Unfortunately, he sought the advice of the wizards of Unseen University on this one, and posed the question thusly: âCan you, taking into account multi-dimensional phase space, meta-statistical anomaly and the laws of probability, guarantee that anything with absolute certainty contains no nuts at all?â(TM) After several days, they had to conclude that the answer was âno
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine trying to tell people to pronounce it ".JIF" after spelling it ".GIF". What were they thinking?!
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine trying to tell people to pronounce it ".JIF" after spelling it ".GIF". What were they thinking?!
I guess they were thinking the same thing as the people that created the words Giant, Giraffe, Generation, Gem, Gym, Germ, Gentle, etc.
The letters C and G have both a hard and soft sound, just like vowels have a short and long sound. At least he didn't decide to pronounce it "J- eye-F"
Just like an animated GIF, this argument comes up about every two or three years. Enough is Enuff.
--
Ghoti [wikipedia.org]
Back in the day, we had APPLE-VISION (Score:2)
Increasingly Alien (Score:5, Insightful)
And to many youngsters, GIFs themselves are increasingly alien too
To many youngsters, *folders* are increasingly alien. Everything goes on the desktop, and to find what you need you use whatever search function is available. Google has ruined us.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As a Gen X'er: Who cares? People want to search by content. User-defined tags are a marginally acceptable alternative.
Whether it's for social media or work, there are usually three or more dimensions for how I want to look things up (date, subject, collaborators), so a traditional folder structure does not make much sense. I still have to search to find things based on N-1 of those criteria.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's a matter of how you think.
If nothing is organized on your computer, if everything is done just by searching, how does that translate into the real world? CAN you properly organize something if you have to if you're so used to just trusting Someone Else (eg. Google) to find it for you whenever you need it?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I can organize things just fine. The most search-dependent person on my team at work is the 75 year old part-timer who is the subject matter expert on practically everything to do with this project. His office is also a mess -- but he knows where everything is.
You have not engaged at all with my point, which is that folders make it easy to sort by one factor at a time, but people often want to look things up based on different attributes. The only way to work around that with a folder structure is to put
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
people often want to look things up based on different attributes. The only way to work around that with a folder structure is to put everything in one folder and use very long file names, so you can easily look for *joebob*widget*review*.
Or just perform a recursive search of subfolders.
That's something that every major operating system has supported for about 30 years now. If you didn't store everything in one folder, you might have stumbled across that feature already.
Re: (Score:2)
In the most general case data will have dozens of attributes and the only solution to managing that with subfolders would be creating dozens of aliases and putting them into all the applicable subfolders. It gets worse - you need to do the same thing to all the subfolders, and for each permutation of combinations of subfolders. This is clearly insane.
I used to keep a collection of images saved from the internet (not even that big, some tens of thousands of files). When Google Image Search and danbooru were
Re:Increasingly Alien (Score:4, Funny)
>but people often want to look things up based on different attributes
I remember a file system designer suggesting the file system should support this natively.
Then he killed his wife.
Be careful - File system opinions have consequences.
Re: (Score:3)
I remember a file system designer suggesting the file system should support this natively.
It was touted as the killer feature.
And it could slaughter... the other filesystems in benchmarks.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a matter of how you think.
If nothing is organized on your computer, if everything is done just by searching, how does that translate into the real world? CAN you properly organize something if you have to if you're so used to just trusting Someone Else (eg. Google) to find it for you whenever you need it?
Considering students don't know what files or directories are [slashdot.org], one can only imagine how screwed up their lives are if they never have to know anything.
Re:Increasingly Alien (Score:4, Insightful)
Replace "files and directories" with "clutch and shifter", and that's exactly what people said about cars when automatic transmissions started to become dominant. It didn't stop people from getting people from A to B, Today, we're down to 32 models of car even available with a stick shift in the US*, it's effectively a non-issue. Except for very narrow cases, it will never matter, and their lives are not screwed up in the least by "never having to know anything".
II the person with the messy desk doesn't know the organization of the filing cabinet they never use gets the same work done as the clean desk person who does, then who cares? There are already tens of millions of people getting by just fine without knowing the inner workings of files and directories.
If they're not in IT, does it really matter? It obviously works well enough for them to function, and doesn't screw up anything, so who cares how those people choose to store and access their files?
*-https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g20734564/manual-transmission-cars/ (28 cars listed, SUV/crossovers are separate article at bottom)
Re:Increasingly Alien (Score:4, Interesting)
"clutch and shifter"
Yeah, and when they travel abroad, they find themselves in a pickle. We had to drive around USA friends because they couldn't drive stick.
Need I go on with the analogy?
Re: (Score:2)
Cute deflection, bro.
Re:Increasingly Alien (Score:5, Informative)
Replace "files and directories" with "clutch and shifter", and that's exactly what people said about cars when automatic transmissions started to become dominant. It didn't stop people from getting people from A to B, Today, we're down to 32 models of car even available with a stick shift in the US*, it's effectively a non-issue. Except for very narrow cases, it will never matter, and their lives are not screwed up in the least by "never having to know anything".
The appropriate car analogy might be having mapreading/wayfinding/local geography skills for when the GPS goes out. If your understanding of how to get from place to place is based entirely on being fed directions one by one from a device that knows where you are and which direction you're travelling in, you might be in trouble without it.
As far as the file and folder analogy in filesystems, the idea of hierarchical named containers seems to be pretty fundamental to organization and it's dead simple to understand. I'm not sure what to even think about people who are unclear on the concept.
Re:Increasingly Alien (Score:5, Interesting)
"Organizing" via search is equivalent to assigning keywords to each photo, and dynamically re-organizing all your photos according to how you want to browse them at a particular moment. Google's implementation is a bit flawed (they don't make clear how searches work, have removed direct access to common logical operators, and even occasionally change how it works so a search which worked yesterday suddenly doesn't work today). But the basic premise behind it is much more useful than organizing into folders. The hard part is properly assigning keywords. Google thinks AI should do that for you (and Google should be in control of that AI). But I think a combination of AI-generated and manually assigned keywords is more useful.
Re: (Score:3)
I have my photos in a primary hierarchy by location then date, but e.g. for my zoo photos I have a second hierarchy by habitat and a third by species, all done in a straightforward ext4 filesystem. It's not hard to symlink, and since the primary hierarchy is immutable I don't need to worry about the symlinks breaking.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like a lot of effort though. When I want a picture of my cat I just search my photos for "cat" and it finds them all for me. I didn't even tag them, Google's AI recognized the animal.
For music I use Musicbrains Picard to automatically tag files, and then search by tag. Used to have them all organized into folders but it's quicker with tags.
For notes I manually tag them in Joplin and then use search. You can organize them into virtual notebooks, but only one at a time. You can have as many tags as you
Re: (Score:2)
To many youngsters, *folders* are increasingly alien. Everything goes on the desktop, and to find what you need you use whatever search function is available. Google has ruined us.
Not just youngsters. My sister is 57 and her laptop screen is *literally* completely covered with icons. I'm a software engineer and system admin and my head wants to explode whenever I have to look at her screen -- I can't fathom how she finds anything there. Her husband said there are actually more icons scrolled off screen?
For comparison, my Windows 10 system has maybe 10 icons on the desktop and my Linux systems have, at most, 3.)
Re: (Score:2)
I was even threatened with the sack if I didn't get them back on one occasion (that might have been a disk failure though).
We had a good laugh about that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I used to be a software engineer, and my desktop is covered in icons. Most are folders, a few are spreadsheets, and a lot of shortcuts.
Personally, I don't like having another layer between me and the things I use most often, and since 99% of the time once I open a program the first thing I do is use the mouse, typing to find everything means shifting my hand twice unnecessarily (mouse to keyboard and back).
Sorry if it offends you, but it's how I work and extremely efficient for me. Not sure why you waste 98
Re: (Score:2)
Clean and organized just doesn't work for some people.
Perhaps, but try working on something like a car and leaving your tools unorganized and they'll never be where you need (or expect) them to be when you need them. Organization is a tool too...
Sorry if it offends you, but it's how I work and extremely efficient for me. Not sure why you waste 98% of your desktop, but hey, if it works for you, that's great, keep at it.
Doesn't offend me (you're being presumptuous) and a clean/empty desktop isn't (necessarily) wasted space. Perhaps a desktop full of icons is helpful, but they must also be organized to some extent too, otherwise you'd be wasting time searching through them. Hopefully, someone right-clicking "Sort by..." on the des
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, but try working on something like a car and leaving your tools unorganized and they'll never be where you need (or expect) them to be
I can remember where I saw a CF card adapter 5 years ago and I know where specific converters live based on the jobs that used them last. Of course if someone else breezes through and moves something the whole "system" is fucked, but then the boss who compulsively tidies his stuff forgets where he filed away things the day before so that's not a panacea either. Organisation is great when you've got a nice pile of neat categories, but when you're standing there with a vintage scan doubler wondering where to
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why you waste 98% of your desktop, but hey, if it works for you, that's great, keep at it.
I use my desktops for applications, not file access.
Re: (Score:2)
Millennials aren't youngsters anymore. Some of them are grandparents. If you want to refer to youngsters, you have to talk about Gen-Z.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
they have an exaggerated sense of self-importance and not enough self-awareness.
That's the human condition.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the human condition.
Not as a hallmark of a generation... unless it is a generation in which it is so exaggerated.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Vice has always been "for retards now"
The boomer computers dont have folders. They have directories.
The gen-x computers have both, depending on which OS was booted.
The millennial computers only have folders filled with inefficiently written video games.
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory (Score:4, Funny)
Slashdot is cutting edge (Score:2)
If gifs are for old timers then Slashdot is cuttings edge. It's so far ahead, it never allowed gifs (or even Unicode).
BREAKING NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)
Online media can always find a handful of people to whine about something inconsequential.
Yeah, nope you fool. (Score:2)
There is no huge argument about file formats. 95% of the population does not know what they are, except 'short, 3 second movies', which they still like, even if the official format is not gif.
Of the 1% that do know what a Gif file format is, 90% do not CARE. Yeah, Gif may be slower and take up too much space, but so what. Unless you are actually administrating a streaming service of some kind, you do NOT CARE.
Of the 1% of the 5% that know about this and care, they are just as likely to be boomers as gen
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, Gif may be slower and take up too much space, but so what.
It depends. I will often grab a funny image to save for later. Very often it is a PNG that is half a meg. For no good reason. Before I send it on, I use gimp to reduce it. Sometimes JPEG wins at 80 to 100 K, sometimes GIF wins, and I reduce the color palette to 16 or less if possible.
Re: (Score:3)
Before I send it on, I use gimp to reduce it. Sometimes JPEG wins at 80 to 100 K, sometimes GIF wins, and I reduce the color palette to 16 or less if possible.
No doubt your comedic timing is impeccable!
Re: (Score:2)
Where are mod points when I need them?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's about various social media platforms trying to push their own content format. And labeling people who just don't care or won't go along with their marketing as old or tragically uncool.
FTFY.
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, you leave us the heck out of these arguments. We don't care.
As for actually being on-topic, I make/run an image-sourcing bot on a popular chat service, and even I don't care about what GIFs are. I pipe them through ffmpeg and tell it to give me a certain frame—this works the same for GIF, mp4, mov, and any other damn video file. So even the "1% of the 5%" don't care.
Feral youth (Score:2, Flamebait)
Feral youth of today declare their version of dancing baloney superior to all others that came before.
OMG LOLZ :-))) (Score:5, Funny)
If anyone asks, I still use ascii smileys like: :-) :-( :-p ... I don't care care what they say, they even work on slashdot :p
I probably should look at this GIF thingy at some point... I think it's gonna catch on :-p
I'm sure there is a geocities page which explains it somewhere... I'll take a look at webcrawler or lycos
Obligatory car analogy: Text smileys are like vintage cars... sure they are not as colorful the latest fad in technology but they got their charm
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone asks, I still use ascii smileys like: :-) :-( :-p ... I don't care care what they say, they even work on slashdot :p
I probably should look at this GIF thingy at some point... I think it's gonna catch on :-p
I'm sure there is a geocities page which explains it somewhere... I'll take a look at webcrawler or lycos
Obligatory car analogy: Text smileys are like vintage cars... sure they are not as colorful the latest fad in technology but they got their charm
I think you can fetch them with gopher.
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone asks, I still use ascii smileys like: :-) :-( :-p
So you'd love watching Star Wars in ASCII [asciimation.co.nz]!
Re: (Score:2)
Even better: Watch the real movie with VLC caca video output.
Re: (Score:2)
If you wait long enough they for sure will be hip again. Just like the flood of indie trash games with pixel art and chip tunes music.
Just wait... (Score:3)
Wait til this guy finds out about emoticons!
Vice has always been "for retards now" (Score:4, Insightful)
People always use what works (Score:3)
The irony is that GIFs came back into fashion when Flash was killed off.
Maybe if the industry wasn't so intent on political and patent wars, old standards wouldn't linger for so long.
Much ado about nothihng (Score:5, Insightful)
Who really gives a shit?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd mod you up if I could -- I was thinking there might be some kind of meaningful story in this, but it was just vacuous nonsense
Wow, 5 people on Twitter thought something? (Score:5, Insightful)
The editorial contains 5 links to twitter users saying something similar to each other, is that news now?
Re:Wow, 5 people on Twitter thought something? (Score:5, Insightful)
Vice isn't news. It's a clickbait farm that coddles the reader base while inventing controversies with The Other of the day.
Why /. would post something from Vice ... is basically exactly the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen what the readership of /. has turned in to?
Posting vice articles makes perfect sense. They're becoming the equivalent of the learning channel playing shit reality tv shows 24/7.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Five twitter links counts as hard hitting journalism these days.
Wouldn't it be more effort? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, I can point my cell phone camera at something and make a tik tok video in a few moments. A gif requires you to use software to put it together.
You mean your phone doesn't automatically background convert H.264 into GIF, Adobe Flash, MPEG2, and ANSI cursor control characters to render in ASCII art??
Mine is already uploading the augmented overlay of a frog matching my facial expression of disappointment in response.
You must have the December model, or worse. Get with the times old man!
"Boomer" is offensive. It is ageist (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Boomer" is offensive. It is ageist (Score:4)
Just like racism and sexism before it, this should not be tolerated.
It's also stupid.
Actual boomers are elderly. It's highly unlikely that the person you are razzing as a "boomer" even is one.
Re: (Score:2)
Would it be better / different if they used the word "olds" instead of "boomers"? The word means nothing on its own. It's the intent that matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Lazy? (Score:2)
Linda Kaye, a cyberpsychology professor at Edge Hill University, hasn't done direct research in this area but theorises that the ever-growing popularity of video-sharing on TikTok means younger generations are more used to "personalised content creation", and GIFs can seem comparatively lazy.
So, the generation(s) who can't spend time for an email or voice call, in favor of (cryptic) texts or, I guess, now video shares are complaining that using GIFs is too lazy? Because it's not "personalized? WTF? Maybe they'd feel differently if they had invented them and/or Mom didn't use them?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Just because... (Score:2)
You know that's a flag, right? You can make GIFs that don't repeat.
Also, I think the take-home from this piece (the only useful one) is that GenXers never used GIFs—they just reek of effort.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters (Score:2)
New flash, young people think old people are uncool. Pretty sure Socrates or Plato pointed that out, around 400 BC.
Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters (Score:5, Insightful)
New flash, young people think old people are uncool.
That's not what we have here. A lot of young people are cool with old people.
The story here is an author wishing they were cool, and pretending they can achieve it by insulting almost everyone. Big F Fail.
teenage me is thinking (Score:2)
/<-RaD d00d! .\\00oo00oo00
GIF folder? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
In their quest for inclusiveness, kindness,tolerance and understanding.
Ageism is totally ok. And date of birth is now your personallity .
Re: (Score:2)
But GIF folder? what is that about?
It's a declaration by the author that they don't have a clue how this computer thing works. I guarantee you no one posting a GIF on twitter ever kept them in a folder.
This has to be the dumbest story I've read on Slashdot.
lol what? (Score:2)
but theorises that the ever-growing popularity of video-sharing on TikTok means younger generations are more used to "personalised content creation", and GIFs can seem comparatively lazy.
Yes, I can see how it would pale against the effort of using some one-click filter to give yourself giant ducklips, but ...
Blame Microsoft (Score:2)
IE and older versions of Microsoft Edge (EdgeHTML based versions) didn't support animated PNG (aPNG), so we are stuck with GIFs. It will take about a decade for fools using outdated browsers to get the fuck off the internet .. so we are stuck with GIFs until at least then. It would have been cool if animated GIF files could be combined with .mod files or 8bit audio. It would be an innovative way to annoy people, up there with the HTML blink tag.
Hey future grandpops (Score:2)
More and more often, I'm being called a "boomer" (despite being a gen-Xer) and a "grandpa" by more and more passive-aggressive youths.
Here's a message for you: before you even realize it, you'll be on the other side of the fence too you ungrateful pricks. Enjoy being young while it lasts.
That is all.
Obey Me. Comply! (Score:2)
In This Article: "Now stop using GIFs and switch to Tikky Tokkies or you'll look dated. Boss' orders!"
Say, Vice... (Score:2)
Why does a George Soros-funded (google it) trollfarm like you feel so threatened by animated .gif files?
Did they hit a nerve somewhere?
This all seems pretty pathetic. I don't know why slashdot even deems this worthy of a topic.
This should be easy... (Score:2)
Now, you'll never get mocked for using a GIF.
You're welcome.
really? (Score:2)
GIFs are out of style? OK. (Score:2)
We finally have the storage space to keep them, and the bandwidth to transfer them, so why the hell not?
It's vice (Score:2)
Why are we even giving the time of day about tech news from a site literally named for the word for moral failings, defects and bad habits? Like, they're literally saying "What we say and do is a bad habit. You shouldn't be listening to us."
Burn all GIFs (Score:2)
We were supposed to burn all GIFs for being patent encumbered (LZW compression) over two decades ago... Nothing of value would have been lost.
https://burnallgifs.org/archiv... [burnallgifs.org]
That GIFs are still around proves we are in the worst technological timeline.
Not that I disagree, but (Score:2)
Why should I care about Vice's opinion regarding anything?
"Low effort" (Score:4, Insightful)
First word bubbles now this (Score:2)
Just a few days ago, /. posted an article about school kids rejecting their peers because the SMS word bubble is green and not blue.
Now we have "You use GIF, you are boomerz! LOLARSKATEZ!"
Seriously, the little tykes who are ragging on people over such trivial things need to shut the fuck up.
Even better, if I was an employer, and I discovered that a prospect engages in this behavior (easy to find out because kids snitch themselves out on the net all the time), into the round file thei
Re: First word bubbles now this (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, I am getting real tired of this bandwagon generational hate that has become the big fad of the late 2010s/early 2020s. Just like the moronic "Battle of the sexes" craze of the 1990s that was designed to divide and conquer, sow seeds of hatred, and make a bunch of scummy rich bastards even richer.
Same. Old. Fucking. Shit.
What's cool this week? (Score:2)
If it is not broken, do not fix it (Score:2)
gif is not broken, there is no need to fix it. Sure, PNG does a good job as well, in some ways better, but unless you have some problem, there is zero reason to moce
away from gif.
I guess nobody at Vice knows what good engineering is and how it works. Pathetic.
Animation was the problem to begin with. (Score:2)
I implemented MNG support in a major web browser sometime around 2000... but Netscape was so engrossed in litigation against Microsoft that Microsoft was terrified to innovate and Netscape simply had stopped developing and spent all their time crying like little babies about why they sucked because Microsoft kept developing... and yet, we managed to make a top-3 browser for years which supported new things all the time without Microsoft being a problem.
GIF
If there's one thing which is over it's Vice (Score:2)
Vice, translated : passé
Vice is done, they dropped the ball, screwed the pooch, backflipped the shark.
Who cares what they think?
Vice was cool, a long, long, long time ago.
Uh. This is VICE. Who cares? (Score:2)
What have these culturally irrelevant political knob slobbers ever been right about anything?
And even if they were, why should anyone care about their illiterate opinions?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why all this hate and discrimination against *boomers* like if they had to feel guilty about it ?
Because boomers and millennial are 2 largest generations. This made both generations obvious targets for marketing. As a result, both have exaggerated egos. Millennials vs boomers is a battle of the egos.