News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hga on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @07:10PM (#9972241)
I'm not aware of Microsoft Word or any editor I've ever used or heard of forbidding me from using the word "retards" or any other. Heck, Gnu Emacs allows me to write proprietary software, a user freedom RMS is no doubt not entirely happy with.

I require that general freedom of expression in my tools and do no tolerate vendors who engage in these sorts of damaging stunts. I suspect I'm not alone, and I note GitHub has a further problem of not being all that sticky, e.g. I moved all my repos off it earlier today after we got confirmation of this.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by erics32 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @08:32PM (#9972600)
Also not the first time Github has deleted a repo for ideological reasons. See: C+=
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by netheril96 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:11PM (#9972705)
Care to elaborate about it? I just found it accessible at https://github.com/ErisBlastar/cplusequality
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by erics32 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:39PM (#9972771)
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by skarap on Thursday July 30, 2015 @10:41AM (#9975255)
Just wanted to thank you. I never heard of the C+= saga - you made my day!
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by huac on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:58PM (#9972831)
it was removed by bitbucket as well.

god, this repo is reprehensive.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by colllectorof on Thursday July 30, 2015 @12:59AM (#9973243)
I don't get the outrage. In fact, I think it's a brilliant parody of post-structuralist jargon, self-contradictions and pretentious verbal mannerisms. If you take this repo as a serious attack against feminism I have to point out that as far as I can see the whole thing has no substance and offers no comments on real-life issues. Zero.

It satirizes a certain vacuous style of writing. Saying that it threatens feminism is like saying that satirizing jargon-heavy research papers threatens science. Is the jargon really all that matters?

I went to Slashdot through the link above which led me back to HN. The reactions just seem bizarre. Even if offensive to some, the readme.md is fully within the traditions of American comedy. You don't get all angry about Jeff Foxworthy's You Might be a Redneck, right? You don't proclaim that he misrepresents the rural poor and trivializes their hardships? Or do you?

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by anonymousab on Thursday July 30, 2015 @01:33AM (#9973300)
Perhaps Github do not feel that satire belongs there.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by Cthulhu_ on Thursday July 30, 2015 @06:38AM (#9974114)
If they didn't then a lot of repos would be removed or censored. If they don't though, then - similar to the 'retard' censorship - they're inconsistent and using double standards (which BTW is also a trait of the SJW subculture the c+= repo parodies)
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by brighteyes on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @10:46PM (#9972956)
It's satire.

edit: why the downvotes? honest question.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by issaria on Thursday July 30, 2015 @05:46AM (#9973959)
People feel the power when the click the downvote button.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by proveanegative on Thursday July 30, 2015 @07:39AM (#9974280)
If this is where the things are going the time may soon come for someone to launch a GitHub clone that deliberately only bans illegal content and provides technological means of protection against Twitter mobs.

Meanwhile, it would be nice to have a reusable code of conduct written with the same attitude. E.g., it would only forbid personal attacks, credible threats of violence against other contributors and violations of the law (like committing warez to the repository). It would deny any responsibility for what the contributors say elsewhere on the Internet and state an unwillingness to discuss their speech on the project grounds. It could include anti-blackmail clauses like that agitating people on social media to "support" your issue by shaming the maintainers will get you banned and the issue closed immediately and irrevocably. The latter would have to be carefully written, though, to not be exploitable.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by seanflyon on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @07:24PM (#9972315)
Could you explicitly state what it is you are referring to? I'm not familiar with github's content restrictions.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hga on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @07:39PM (#9972391)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118

tl;dr: Observed fact, GitHub disappeared a repo (this I personally know for a fact) and all its forks, the only reason we can surmise is that it described itself as "X for retards". I believe it's this one https://github.com/WebMBro/WebMConverter now described as "WebM for bakas." (Japanglish for idiots or fools).

Per this https://imgur.com/QC51FZz it was indeed for the use of that word.

I'd be more willing to extend some slack to GitHub if they hadn't precipitously turned off their service for these repos, that's worse than this example of their "tolerance", but who knows what it'll be next?

Who knows how this will play out in the long term; their trashing of their meritocracy rug suggests this is not a one off (ADDED: and erics32 reminded me of C+=). Why should I or anyone else concerned about long term stability invest in their particular value adds when they show such capriciousness?

The great point, in relation to this topic of their latest investment, is that companies that depend almost entirely on their "communities" can screw those up and destroy their value.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by geographomics on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:07PM (#9972699)
What a curious turn of events. Is "retard" particularly offensive in some cultures? I wasn't aware it had such inflammatory power behind it.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by samt on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:31PM (#9972753)
Yes it is highly offensive to many English speaking individuals in the US. It has historically been used as a highly derogatory term for disabled individuals.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hga on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:41PM (#9972787)
It's certainly at minimum an insulting word, and in this context unambiguously so.

In the context of, say, aerodynamics, its merely a word of art, e.g. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aerodynamic+braking

It'll be another word, perhaps in a more ambigious context, next time. Which brings up another point: I just don't want to have to worry about what will become this politically incorrect in the future when I'm writing code and documentation.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by rmc on Thursday July 30, 2015 @03:37AM (#9973593)
> I just don't want to have to worry about what will become this politically incorrect in the future when I'm writing code and documentation.

Then don't say/write bigotted things. Honestly, it's like asking people not to write spelling or grammar mistakes in documentation. It's not that hard.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hueving on Thursday July 30, 2015 @03:52AM (#9973626)
tell that to airbus engineers. Perhaps you can boycott flying on every airbus because it says "retard" to the pilots on landing.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by rmc on Thursday July 30, 2015 @08:13AM (#9974397)
Do you not know that words can have more than one meaning? From the context you can tell the meaning. When airbus use "retard" they're using it to mean "to slow down".

It's not "these 6 letters in this combination is banned", it's "stop insulting people based on mental illnesses".

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hueving on Friday July 31, 2015 @05:11AM (#9980717)
It's not insulting people based on mental illnesses though. The software wasn't for people with mental illnesses.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by ams6110 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @10:37PM (#9972932)
It's a perfectly good word that should not be banned:

This patch retards the rate of retry attempts after three consecutive failures

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by onion2k on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @11:03PM (#9972984)
It wouldn't be banned in that context.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by saryant on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @11:35PM (#9973050)
That requires people to understand context and nuance.

We live in a world where a guy wants to ban Mel Brooks' The Producers because he doesn't realize it's a satire of Hitler, not an homage. Lots of people don't or won't appreciate context.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by rmc on Thursday July 30, 2015 @03:36AM (#9973590)
The context of the original repo was very clearly that of an insulting word.

re: The Producers, with any topic you'll get one or two extremists of any varity. You should judge it not by "did someone want to stop this", but instead by "did someone(s) in power to stop it, want to stop it". One crank protesting outside a cinema is very different from the CEO of a movie studio deciding not to make the film.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by s73v3r on Thursday July 30, 2015 @01:55AM (#9973344)
And generally people who don't understand context are laughed off the stage and not taken seriously.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by okasaki on Thursday July 30, 2015 @04:06AM (#9973674)
Apparently not on github, however.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by afandian on Thursday July 30, 2015 @04:55AM (#9973808)
The whole argument hangs on that point. I don't know where your optimism comes from. Seeing a lot of human behaviour on the net in this area, I have pretty much zero confidence that the right decision would always be made.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by _ak on Thursday July 30, 2015 @07:43AM (#9974298)
"Mental retardation" has been a medical term since relatively recently. The "retardation" means nothing more than "being held back". But people did pick it up as a derogatory term, and so it was replaced with "intellectual disability". A classic euphemism treadmill.

In the context of medication, "retard" is still in use: it describes medication that is released steadily and continuously into the bloodstream.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by geographomics on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:43PM (#9972794)
Useful to know, thanks. I was quite surprised by the furore as in the UK it's typically not deemed quite so offensive.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by justincormack on Thursday July 30, 2015 @12:18PM (#9976011)
It is fairly offensive in the UK too. But we usually use fucktard instead I guess which confuses the issue.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by rmc on Thursday July 30, 2015 @03:33AM (#9973576)
Not just USA, in a lot of the rest of the Anglosphere it's insulting.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by scubadude on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @11:20PM (#9973017)
Think for a minute that you had an intellectual disability. Would you be comfortable with people casually using the word?
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by ploxiln on Thursday July 30, 2015 @12:02AM (#9973110)
This reaction to the word will over time also come to the replacement word that people will need to come up with to refer to the condition.

"idiot" and "imbecile" used to be the terms used by medical professionals to refer to mentally retarded people in the 50s and 60s. Then those terms became insults, so they started using the term "mentally retarded". Now that retard has become an insult, another word will have to be found, (handicapped? slow?) and then it will become an insult, and they'll have to find another word...

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by omegaham on Thursday July 30, 2015 @05:05AM (#9973839)
Also known as the "euphemism treadmill."

The next phase has already begun - "You were one of the special children, weren't you" is a pretty common start to an ass-chewing in the military. They'll have to move on pretty soon.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by hueving on Thursday July 30, 2015 @03:55AM (#9973638)
I'm not comfortable with people casually contributing to nodejs. Can I have that banned?
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by joesmo on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @09:19PM (#9972724)
"The great point, in relation to this topic of their latest investment, is that companies that depend almost entirely on their "communities" can screw those up and destroy their value."

I think it's pretty much inevitable once the money rolls in that companies like Github and others will start censoring content and generally doing things that upset the community to appease their investors. I can't think of a single company that doesn't do this, and in many cases it has led to a downturn of the company if not outright demise.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by s73v3r on Thursday July 30, 2015 @01:57AM (#9973348)
I don't think as many people are upset by these being taken down as you think.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by joesmo on Thursday July 30, 2015 @11:10AM (#9975497)
Not this particular Github repo maybe, but once they start taking down stuff, they will eventually hit something that will make people quite upset. Though from what other social networks generally experience, that won't be enough to drive a lot of users away, usually just the core ones which is enough to start the momentum away from the platform.
Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by crucini on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @10:16PM (#9972876)
Github has chosen the left/PC side, certainly, as evidenced by the rug death. But I suspect this will help them rather than hurt, as the majority of developers are probably left/PC, as is leadership of major tech companies. They are aligning with the power structure.

Do you think Bitbucket would stand up to a PC Twitter campaign? I think not; only the explicitly ideological want to fight such battles.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by gizmo686 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @07:33PM (#9972358)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118

This was on the front page recently. 741 comments and only 480 upvotes, so it wouldn't suprise me if it set off the flamewar filter and got pushed off.

Re:GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation by jessaustin on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @08:57PM (#9972674)
It was surprising how long that stayed on the front page: it was still there when comments were ~550 and upvotes were at least a hundred less.