Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 127 posts

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#71

Post by Kalium »

bovermyer wrote: post #10
Aloha wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm both aghast and amused that people are making a big deal about master/slave when used in the context of computers.

The way I look at it, the amount of effort required to change that terminology is less than the amount of community discomfort generated by keeping it.

That's an excellent heuristic when the people doing the work are also the people experiencing discomfort! Each person so affected can make their own decision from ample firsthand information.

It might become more subtle in scenarios where the two are disjoint groups, raising the question of how to compare them. I don't see an easy way of quantifying each that allows for such, but I'm sure that's just my own failures of imagination. Can you help me?

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#72

Post by codezero »

donatzsky wrote: post #70
codezero wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll add another point: if the reason to not do this is the effort, then why is effort being put into generative art in redis? To be clear, I think this is neat, and appreciate that antirez can and should add some joy into the world in what ever way they see fit. I'm just playing devil's advocate. With that said, changing terminology is more than just a code change, there's a bunch of documentation, as well as possib…

> I'll add another point: if the reason to not do this is the effort, then why is effort being put into generative art in redis? Seemed to me like it was a subtle middle finger to the complainers.

I’d be surprised if that was true, but that’s an interesting thing to consider.

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#73

Post by tmp407ER3DIE »

antirez wrote: post #59
danesparza wrote: post #56

Wow! "should be replaced by a new implementation at each new version of Redis" I hope he at least lets you invoke these commands with a version at least. I'd hate to let a work of art go unappreciated.

Yep! That's the idea. If you write LOLWUT version 5 you'll see past versions.

antirez, typo in the command and in the blog post: Georg Ness -> Georg Nees (per the Wikipedia article at least).

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#75

Post by bovermyer »

ac2u wrote: post #64
bovermyer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I look at it, the amount of effort required to change that terminology is less than the amount of community discomfort generated by keeping it.

To that I say: If you think it's that easy, you personally should be the one to do the work to change it. Now that sounds incredibly snarky, for that I apologise. But it does sum up a lot of people's thoughts towards it, and it's no more snarky that the typical twitter driveby of 'it's just a find/replace' Anyone who has actually read the author's explanation (not saying you haven't), knows that he would choose diffe…

I didn't say it was trivial.

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#76

Post by xabuq »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #65
xabuq wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read his other blog posts? He is not an exclusionary person, and labeling him as such, based on an impulsive reaction to an abstract word, with multiple contextual interpretations, is a misguided interpretation of recent events. His frustration at irrational demands for unnecessary effort is understandable.

I have read what he’s been writing about this. By the way, “irrational demands for unnecessary effort” is a value judgment.

Yeah, the inverse is also a value judgement.

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#77

Post by scrollaway »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #51
umvi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me very angry when "they" (I'm not even sure who "they" are or what their motives are) go around policing random software projects for political correctness compliance, bullying/mobbing the maintainers if they don't comply, etc. These people even go after your project if one of your maintainers is deemed politically incorrect outside of the scope of the project (i.e. on Twitter) and demand they be kicked out…

> I miss the days when politics and political correctness didn't directly affect software projects. They've always affected software projects, they just haven't affected you . > What do these political police stand to gain from all of this? Making other people feel as welcome in software as you've already been by default.

> they just haven't affected you.

Not OP but it's extremely pretentious to assume that.

More generally, assuming that "people against changes (that you personally think are positive towards minorities)" are not part of said minorities tends to be as incorrect as assuming that the people in favor of those changes are part of them.

Furthermore, just because the term "minority" implies that there is a minority of people in that group, there are many minorities which together form far larger groups. So "encountering a minority" isn't uncommon. And I've seen on multiple occasions horribly-arrogant people addressing some of my white male friends, claiming they're oblivious to "the plight of minorities", all because said friends didn't come forward to explain they're gay.

So all that to say, don't assume the person you're replying to hasn't been affected by those things. Even if you're correct, it's not a correct nor even safe thing to assume.

> Making other people feel as welcome in software as you've already been by default.

If you're only superficially aware of the issues involved, it's easy to think that superficial changes will suddenly improve things. It's also all too easy to ignore the fallout of those changes.

Reminds me of PETA's philosophy towards animals: If they can't be free, then they're better off dead. Ignoring that PETA:

1. Isn't objectively correct / morally right

2. Harms the greater cause with their methods (by harming public perception)

In general, not being tactful is a terrible idea. Forcing changes through is a terrible idea. Bullying people is a terrible idea. And if you think these tactics are worth it to "make people feel more welcome", I don't know you.

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#78

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

citilife wrote: post #21
ksri wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. First was the Apache commons clause license, and responding to random folks who assumed Redis was going closed source. Then the current issue of changing master slave termibology,and having to hear negative things from both the camps. Lolwut is the perfect break from madness.

I think it's sad this was a debate at all. As a maintainer, there is some responsibility to respond to people who are working with you or using your product. On the other hand, personally I would have just said: "deal with it". The fact of the matter is, virtually no one has been or is a slave, no one is being mocked, no one is being belittled, it's a term used to describe a system. Sure, it could be more "politicall…

> The fact of the matter is, virtually no one has been or is a slave

why do you believe that?

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#79

Post by JoshTriplett »

scrollaway wrote: post #77
JoshTriplett wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I miss the days when politics and political correctness didn't directly affect software projects. They've always affected software projects, they just haven't affected you . > What do these political police stand to gain from all of this? Making other people feel as welcome in software as you've already been by default.

> they just haven't affected you. Not OP but it's extremely pretentious to assume that. More generally, assuming that "people against changes (that you personally think are positive towards minorities)" are not part of said minorities tends to be as incorrect as assuming that the people in favor of those changes are part of them. Furthermore, just because the term "minority" implies that there is a minority of people…

I responded to a comment pining for the days of politics not affecting software, by pointing out that software development always has been. I'm not commenting on any particular changes here, I'm commenting on the position of "I don't want to think about politics" being a position that biases in favor of the status quo.

Apart from that, I'm not suggesting that people should ignore normal contribution procedures and conventions when making such contributions. Nothing in my comment is endorsing ever single person who has ever made such a contribution, regardless of the approach they took. I am, however, suggesting that maintainers who refuse such contributions (for reasons like "I don't want to do this" rather than "this change has issues, please address them") are part of the problem.

Re: LOLWUT: a piece of art inside a database command

#80

Post by pseudalopex »

xabuq wrote: post #43
wahnfrieden wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s announcing it (and built it) as a reaction against the master/slave naming issue. It’s a political statement dismissing removal of exclusionary language. Not sure why I’m being downvoted because he’s publicly stated this on Twitter explicitly several times.

Did you read his other blog posts? He is not an exclusionary person, and labeling him as such, based on an impulsive reaction to an abstract word, with multiple contextual interpretations, is a misguided interpretation of recent events. His frustration at irrational demands for unnecessary effort is understandable.

Calling language exclusionary isn't labeling a person.
Post reply on HN