←back to thread

Laptops with Stickers

(stickertop.art)
610 points z303 | 7 comments | | HN request time: 1.007s | source | bottom
Show context
Defletter ◴[] No.45899494[source]
> Your real middle class refuses to show any but the most bland books and magazines on its coffee tables: otherwise, expressions of opinion, awkward questions, or even ideas might result. -Paul Fussell, Class

The greyification of our lives, the loss of whimsy and kitsch and being too afraid to be a little cringe, I get the sense that a lot of people associate "growing up" as the loss of any and all expression: we wake up in our grey beds in our millennial grey house, drive to work in our grey car to work in our grey cubical, etc, etc. If you want a gauche laptop covered in stickers, do it, embrace the gauche. Everyone sneering at you is more miserable than you.

replies(9): >>45900069 #>>45900257 #>>45900473 #>>45900683 #>>45900690 #>>45900958 #>>45902669 #>>45904695 #>>45907086 #
SparkBomb ◴[] No.45900473[source]
It has nothing to do with that.

A good portion of these stickers are to do with things that are political or quasi political. What tends to happen is that a lot if times people have been burned in someway for supporting an idea or a cause. This is often because people have been fooled by charlatan, or it was later revealed that things were more complicated or different than they were led to believe.

Cringe and why people hate it is best explained by watching the very first episode of the UK office.

Most people want to go to work, turn up and do their time and go home. People that are often top enthusiastic are difficult to deal with day to day. People that adorn their personal possessions with slogans are seen as a warning sign.

replies(2): >>45901250 #>>45902514 #
1. creaturemachine ◴[] No.45901690[source]
Prior to secret ballots being a thing you would have voted "viva voce" by saying your preference aloud. Violence and intimidation were common.
2. marcosdumay ◴[] No.45901779[source]
There's no problem with publicly engaging in politics. In fact, it's a great thing to do.

What is a problem is doing it on an environment where participation is mandatory or required for basic survival.

replies(1): >>45901922 #
3. SparkBomb ◴[] No.45901922[source]
I think generally people are I'll equipped to engage publicly in politics. Politics is an extremely dirty game and can be extremely divisive.
replies(1): >>45902166 #
4. 2OEH8eoCRo0 ◴[] No.45902166{3}[source]
My friends are willing to give me the benefit of the doubt. Strangers usually only offer shallow ridicule and trolling- especially online.
5. benchly ◴[] No.45902372[source]
> sacred knowledge?

I think you might be romanticizing this, a bit. When you convince the public that not talking about something is the best course of action, they become a lot easier to control. We learned this during WWII with the propaganda machine that was fully employed on all fronts, and arguably before that with the work of Edward Bernays and people like him. If public discourse and debate could be quashed, then it was much, much easier to simply tell everyone what their opinions of a thing should be.

replies(1): >>45902560 #
6. 2OEH8eoCRo0 ◴[] No.45902560[source]
Where do I say not to talk about it?
replies(1): >>45902823 #
7. jakeydus ◴[] No.45902823{3}[source]
I think that on its face the term "sacred knowledge" kind of communicates an intimacy that indicates that it's not something that's shared with people who don't have a privileged relationship with you.

I think the big difference now is that people have a megaphone in the form of social media and they forget just how wide the statements they shout through it can spread.