The thread is active again now on request of Photon.
Why leave the thread active?
It’s the dumbest post I’ve seen yet on this forum since I joined. It’s profoundly stupid. I’d argue it but it’s already been done by everyone who proved that idiot Peterson wrong (yes, this Photon character clearly has been ingesting more Jordan Peterson than is healthy, which is to say any amount above zero).
This is just horse manure.
That Steinberg has restored my post is proof of their genuine commitment to supporting freedom of speech. I’m impressed. Actually, I’m so impressed that I’m going to consider buying the upgrade to Cubase Pro 10 after all.
I care about freedom of speech – and so should you – because it’s your right to say things that I disagree with. And vice versa. To quote some famous authors:
“Take away freedom of speech, and the creative faculties dry up.” (George Orwell)
“It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.” (Louis Brandeis)
“He who stifles free discussion, secretly doubts whether what he professes to believe is really true.”
“Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” (Thomas Jefferson)
“Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. [Freedom of speech], of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down.”
“Every important freedom that Western individuals possess rests on free expression. We observe what is wrong, and we say what is wrong, in order that it may be corrected. … If you cannot voice — or even consider — criticism, then you will never see what is wrong.”
So, before you demand that my original post be censored, consider that, thanks to our freedom of speech, you have the right to mock what I have written. You also have the right to engage in rational discourse. It’s your choice, and it’s your right – to freedom of speech. But if you deprive me of that right, then you will inevitably lose it yourself.
Those famous authors weren’t commenting on the speech in a forum belonging to a private corporation. It’d be one thing if the censorship was regarding reporting of bugs that affected people who paid for a product rather than you whining about seeing a woman with a partially shaved head in a commercial.
I sincerely hope you understand the difference.
You should post your complaints in a forum dedicated to politics. I’m sure you could lose yourself for hours in one. And I’d guess Peterson is smart enough to have set one up to make even more money off of the oppressed majority.
If it spares my eyes from seeing the nonsense in the OP I’m ok with not being allowed to post political nonsense in this section. That’d be fine by me.
And yes, it’s absolutely nonsense.
Is this FaceBook??
I would have banned you already, BAM
This is a software forum, it’s about software, not ‘freedom of speech’, although Steinberg allows a little leeway here and there.
It was pretty wild here back in the day, in one word, Azlbrax… !
I come here to get away from all the anti-vaxers and flat earthers…
was fun while it lasted…
…oh what the hell… gay frogs!!!
Gay frogs have the right to be frogs, or are you anti-frog?
I totally agree with you, @Photon. When I saw these pictures of halfshaved person, the first thought was - is it she or he? I cannot see anything in these pictures and videos while my attention stuck on this person’s body that totally destroys creativity. You know our body is talking in every move, in every picture. Our body is true art of God. But sometimes someone wants to blow up their business and they use any method that destroys your comfort zone let you put your attention on them.
And like Photon I will buy upgrades every year anyway. Is this halfshaved ugly advert for those who claim to crossgrade from Pro Tools? Do you really think they will make a decission after this ugly advert?
Take a look on Spitfire Audio videos! There is one (not only one) beautiful girl called Homay. These (not only these) videos inspires a lot.
Better results would be if there in adverts play their role someone like Hans Zimmer, Tom Holkenborg (Junkie-XL) and other good public people, who use Cubase. So are they too expensive for this kind of adverts?
This is Steinberg Lounge forum. The lounge never meant software.
This says more about you (and Photon) than it does about that person. Seriously. It speaks volumes about you both.
This isn’t the 1950’s. It’s 2018.
There is no god. Never has been.
But let’s say there is a god: Who are you to judge the appearance of other people? That’s up to you? Assuming you’re a Christian - are we not made in his image? How can you believe in a god that created us yet then turn around and condemn this person for not being pretty enough? Is that Christian/whatever of you?
How incredibly shallow. You see a woman with half the head shaved and it makes you so uncomfortable you have to post about it on a forum!?
“Never judge a book by its cover”…
“What would Jesus do?”
ring a bell?
You’re missing the point. This forum only exists because of the company that makes software. The term “freedom of speech” refers to our ability to express ourselves publicly on matters of politics without having authorities censoring us. Steinberg is a privately owned company and it’s not Steinberg’s job to provde a platform for sour men who wants to protest seeing women they don’t like the look of that remind them that some people on this planet are different. Steinberg could close this section tomorrow if it wanted.
I shudder at the thought of what other “looks” of people might make you uncomfortable.
Mattias, the word “lounge” means only lounge without subcategories - lounge of software or lounge of hardware. Don’t know which describes you best. It seems that you always are at work here and therefore don’t accept the meaning of lounge other than in context of software.
No, I’m not christian and I’m not ill of Jesus theory. Many people are stucked with division in christians/non-christians. I’m here not for theological discussion.
If there is no God then you are too far from yourself.
You are totally wrong at this point (but these are not your words, you simply replicate loud sentences to lower other people’s consciousness, it’s psychology).
As a graphic designer, doing book covers for many years, I can claim that ugly book cover is 100% related to lack of taste. In a context of Cubase 10 advertisement developers are wise programmers, sound engineers are great at their position, but the company have (and has) problems with designers. And these are not my words. Now it seems that Cubase 10 includes many fixes that will make me and other sensual artists very happy
Mattias, you know - there should be an artist in you, there should be a feeling of world and people as One (this is right definition of God) who is alive only because of the foundation which was made centuries before. In that case you can define what is beautiful and what ugly.
Next time please find the right words, because we are those who pay for your lives, Steinberg team!
Dude, listen for a second: “Freedom of Speech” the way it was talked about first in this thread has nothing to do with a private corporation having a forum for their customers. That’s not what it’s about. You can be censored here and/or the “lounge” section (in which we apparently can discuss if women look ‘good’ and ‘feminine’ enough) could be closed - and if that happened you could still go publicly express your views about your government if you live in a free society in which you have “Freedom of Speech”. I don’t like people getting censored here if it’s about the products. That’s not what this is.
Think about this for more than a second.
If you don’t want to talk about your god then don’t mention your god. I have no idea why people who believe in god feel it’s so important to bring god up repeatedly, yet when their god or faith is questioned we should stop talking about it. It’s all very convenient.
I’m a deity? That’s more than I could have ever hoped for…!
That sentence makes absolutely no sense.
You’re judging that woman in the video based on the way she looks. It’s unnecessary to do so, it’s a bit insulting and offensive (to her), and it’s dumb.
That’s right. And you looked at this woman and chose to define her as apparently pretty ugly, and prefer instead to look at girls that you think are pretty.
You know absolutely nothing about the character that she plays in the ad (since she might be an actress)
You know absolutely nothing about her as a creator in case she’s not an actress, and instead a creator
You know absolutely nothing about her as a fellow human being
All you did was judge her because of the way she looks.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years it’s that some of the nicest looking most well spoken people are some of the most rotten. And vice versa.
You’re basing this on how this woman looks. That is all.
I think you need to get a grip on reality.
PS: There is no god.
Exactly! At least one sentence you understood!
Think about some things wise people told:
You are what you eat.
You are what you wear.
You are what you fashion.
and so on…
And if someone feels good if looking like fool, I don’t care. But if it becomes as a company’s face I’m forced to watch, ignoring what I want to see, then something went terribly wrong.
And since I am the user of product you are trying to sell me every year again and again and I accept this business, then it should be normal that you and your team not only censoring us, but try to take in account something.
Look what you did… now I have to buy a new one!
Old gear always is tended to break
Yes, you should upgrade your engine to 64bit. Maybe you will feel thin strings of artist inside
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Haircut. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Cubase 10. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Your mom. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Woof woof. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Gotta go get my VUdoo Meter replaced …
@MattiasNYC, I told you - this is lounge!
Is this halfshaved ugly advert for those who claim to crossgrade from Pro Tools? Do you really think they will make a decission after this ugly advert?
I agree with @ANeeman that in the Cubase 10 advertising video, the girl’s haircut is neither appealing nor persuasive. But what’s truly disturbing is the implied message that we can ignore our biology. Granted, not everyone perceives this implied message in the video. And perhaps Steinberg did not mean to communicate it. But to me, the video reflects a political viewpoint that I disagree with, and this made me feel reluctant to buy the product.
To answer some of the comments in this thread, I think adults have a right to make informed choices about how to use their bodies, and children have a right to be told the scientific facts of biology, free from any Cultural Marxist ideological bias. Fortunately, the rights of children in this regard have been championed by University of Toronto psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson. Contrary to one comment in this thread, Peterson has not been proven wrong. But this discussion is about Steinberg’s advertising, not about Jordan Peterson.
That said, surely we can all agree that Steinberg’s advertising should never reflect any political viewpoint or ideology. I also think most Steinberg customers would prefer advertising that highlights the practical features and benefits of Steinberg products, in detail, rather than close-up views of fashion models’ faces and haircuts. Furthermore, I believe that most Cubase users value the freedom of speech we all enjoy. I’m very pleased that Steinberg has supported that by restoring my previously censored original post, and allowing this discussion to take place.
I am in denial about this horse dying, so I shall beat it a little more.
The ad in question isn’t a political statement. It’s a marketing attempt to capture the demographic that esteems that look. Photon’s and ANeeman’s reaction to it here reflects their personal taste and cultural mores.
One’s opinion doesn’t have to be factual to merit publication. Personally, I find the view in the OP odious, and that’s my opinion.