Comments on: Geek Pr0n

Geek Pr0n

RufusW — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:57:43 -0800

Geek Pr0n. Black and white and colour. [a little NSFW]

By: RufusW

RufusW — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:58:08 -0800

I don't think it's a double... first FPP.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:01:03 -0800

And SFW!

By: jenovus

jenovus — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:02:28 -0800

. . . and SFW :(

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:03:07 -0800

I read it as Greek, first of all. Man am I bummed out, now.

By: 6am

6am — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:04:25 -0800

i recognise all the computer hardware, but what's that pinky squishy stuff underneath? doesn't ring a bell.

By: atom128

atom128 — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:05:52 -0800

some NSFW in Color.

By: sourwookie

sourwookie — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:17:37 -0800

Sure, I can get into the idea of a naked chick playing Gameboy--who couldn't? The others, though, seem awfully contrived. Getting a girl to balance a graphics card on each nipple neither makes a statement nor makes for good visual form.

By: RufusW

RufusW — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:18:30 -0800

sorry for the NSFW, would edit but doesn't look like I can...

By: CRM114

CRM114 — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:21:24 -0800

It says "Pr0n" straightaway. I think that for 99% of the MeFi audience, pr0n = NSFW. Fear not, Rufus.

By: Gator

Gator — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:26:17 -0800

Kinda boring. Looking at the numerous bellybutton shots, I'm reminded of that scene in Hot Shots! where Charlie Sheen kept slapping more and more ridiculous foodstuffs onto Valeria Golino's "little sizzling tummy."

By: moonbird

moonbird — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:31:59 -0800

I'm going to have to Photoshop in a winkie for this to work on my OS.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:39:52 -0800

No nipples or labias, therefor worksafe? Depends on where you work.

By: DaShiv

DaShiv — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:58:22 -0800

You had me at hello. A classic 1D MkI with a 24/1.4? Can't fault the man's taste in photo gear -- hawt!

By: mullacc

mullacc — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:08:20 -0800

Unfortunately, it's not tab A in slot B type porn.

By: BlackLeotardFront

BlackLeotardFront — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:29:10 -0800

ASCII PORN

By: PurplePorpoise

PurplePorpoise — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:32:27 -0800

What, no soldering irons and breadboards? (Kinda interesting premise. Some of those b&w shots might not look out of place on the walls of some tech startup's headquarters.)

By: furtive

furtive — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:34:16 -0800

DaShiv, I saw that the file name had 1541 in it, but was dissapointed it wasn't what I was expecting.

By: HTuttle

HTuttle — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:44:22 -0800

That's not geek porn. Real geek porn has no women in it, just tech stuff.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:20:25 -0800

Lame for geek photography, lame for nude photography. Give me a desirable piece of technology and place it with the nude, and it's at least intellectually interesting. Give me a nude nerd with a favorite game controller and it's on topic. What I've been given here is poor nude pictures that use the model and the technology as soulless props.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:22:37 -0800

Eh. Just looked at more of the color pics, and see there's a little more depth. I still hate it, though :-p

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:39:28 -0800

[added a small nsfw indicator]

By: flabdablet

flabdablet — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:52:12 -0800

Aaargh! All those memory cards and no antistatic bags!

By: nickerbocker

nickerbocker — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:01:03 -0800

I thought that was really cool.

By: muppetboy

muppetboy — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:03:05 -0800

Whatever! Where are the talking frogs!?

By: Gamblor

Gamblor — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:45:14 -0800

I read it as Greek, first of all. Gah, I did the same thing. Then I looked at the photos for a couple of seconds, with my head tilted like the RCA dog, thinking, "I don't get it."

By: dhartung

dhartung — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 22:27:59 -0800

cat5 bondage [sfw] There's a less sfw group of pics floating around that allegedly cost a Unix sysadmin at a West Coast data center his job (and several people the domains they used to host the photos). I believe I saw it, but it's quite gone now. If anybody can explicate.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:44:10 -0800

Eh, it's a little too SCSI for my tastes.

By: hellphish

hellphish — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:28:55 -0800

Eh, it's a little too SCSI for my tastes. Nice one, Eideteker.

By: kindall

kindall — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 00:57:40 -0800

Those pictures really got my firewire hot-plugged.

By: Drexen

Drexen — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:47:54 -0800

Ugh!! What a let-down. See, this is a premise that could have led to some really nice, genuinely erotic pictures. Rather than displaying women as essentially perfect, plasticated barbie dolls, splayed and displayed for male inspection, you could actually portray (gasp!) women with personalities, with their own interests, with an eye for good equipment (pun intended) and and with a geekishly frank, individualistic sexuality - but with a hint of nervous, inexperienced shyness. See? Hot. Instead? We get this lame, "edgy", un-subtle art-school wank. Really, if they think putting a microchip on some girl's belly button is erotic, even to a "geek", then they have some weird (read: stoopid) ideas. I guess this is about the closest they get to even vaguely alluring.

By: butterstick

butterstick — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:13:46 -0800

What awful photography. I am both a geek (Software Engineer), and a photographer (11+ years) to boot.

By: davros42

davros42 — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 14:58:41 -0800

Doesn't it have to be arousing to be porn? Naked people != pornography, people. Prurient interests, remember?

By: pwally

pwally — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:07:52 -0800

filth....