Lena (or Lenna, spelling varies) is not anime - it's a crop of a Playboy centerfold that has been a standard bitmapped reference image for decades. It's been used in literally hundreds, if not thousands of academic papers on image processing, as well as a variety of benchmarks, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna
Are we looking at the same image? The one I clicked on in GP's message is an anime-looking person holding a sword. It doesn't look much like the picture on the Lenna wikipedia article you posted.
It's from Urusei Yatsura[1]. It indeed looks like a bunch of Anime stuff. Scans of animation cells and other ephemera. It would have taken awhile to download on a modem.
These conversations happen so often on HN I wonder if there is some sort of working memory limit on the participants that rapidly removes context from the comment they're replying to:
> > > > > Here are some numbers: [6, 2, 34]
> > > > That's neat, one of them is prime
> > > 6 isn't prime, its factors are 2 and 3
> > Are we reading the same comment? There is a prime there
I'd like to propose that we generalize this particular part of the conversation, and coin the term "XY Argument" (unless a name for it already exists?)
> > > > That's neat, one of them is prime
> > > 6 isn't prime, its factors are 2 and 3
I believe it's the equivalent of the [XY Problem], except in the context of an (imagined) disagreement. It happens because the second comment is misinterpreted to be arguing against the first when really it may be in addition. It can be fixed by readers taking a charitable interpretation of the second comment, or by the second commenter's author making it clear that they're not disagreeing, as in,
> > > Yes, and 6 isn't prime, its factors are 2 and 3
I'm pulling out these two comments because it's a much more common pattern than just this comment chain; I think it happens all the time with text in general. Actually, I'm commenting here because it just [happened to me] in a different context. Someone I thought I was arguing with turned out to mostly agree with me — but because we failed to re-affirm the parts of each other's arguments that we agreed with, it seemed like we disagreed more than we did.
