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

A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

apiguy.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 175 posts

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#121

Post by simianparrot »

fredrikholm wrote: post #111
simianparrot wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow Scandinavian, DHH is just writing what the vast majority of us think. And it isn’t racist. That word is being misused until it soon has no value left; you sure you want that?

I'm happy to say that ~80% of Sweden and Norway don't vote for right wing populist parties like SD and Fremskrittspartiet, so "vast majority of us" might be a bit of a stretch.

That's a misrepresentation of statistics though. FRP is the second largest party this election, with 23,8% of votes, only second to AP who got 28%. But many people won't vote based on the immigration issues, because so far, other issues are more pressing.

But my point was that I am absolutely sure the majority of Norwegians _want Norway to remain a country that retains its cultural history_ while not being exclusive to one ethnic group. It's about retaining a majority.

I don't understand why that sentiment is so problematic here on HN, because simultaneously people are clamoring for a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people.

Why can't Norway have a Norwegian state for the Norwegian people? Or Denmark? Or the UK?

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#122

Post by simianparrot »

watwut wrote: post #114
simianparrot wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow Scandinavian, DHH is just writing what the vast majority of us think. And it isn’t racist. That word is being misused until it soon has no value left; you sure you want that?

The word racism is not diluted. It is that just some full on racists feel like it says something negative and thus don't want the label put on racists stuff they like.

So do you consider what the Danish PM said racist?

> There are really a lot of us Danes who believed that when people came to this ‘world’s best country’ and were given such good opportunities, they would integrate. They would become Danish, and they would never, ever harm our society. All of us who thought that way have been wrong.

That's objectively observed reality in Denmark. And in Scandinavia in general. It's not about race, it's not about skin color, it's about cultural heritage and values.

All we're saying is that to retain a country's cultural heritage and carry it -- and obviously shape it -- into the future, you have to retain a majority of that heritage, and integrate newcomers. Otherwise it's no longer Denmark.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#123

Post by forgingahead »

fwip wrote: post #45
jmcgough wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found this helpful in explaining what's happened: https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/22/ruby_central_rubygems... Sounds like they made some really big changes and put zero effort into communicating to people who've spent 10+ years working on the project.

Thanks - that was helpful indeed. From there, I also found the linked post by Tekin Süleyman ( https://tekin.co.uk/2025/09/the-ruby-community-has-a-dhh-pro... ) to be informative.

Tekin's conclusion: "it will send a clear message to the wider Ruby community (and those who may be considering joining it) that the majority does not stand with DHH and his toxic views."

He is going to be ultra surprised to learn what the majority thinks and how it's not what he thinks it is.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#124

Post by Dr_Incelheimer »

ellen364 wrote: post #116
simianparrot wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow Scandinavian, DHH is just writing what the vast majority of us think. And it isn’t racist. That word is being misused until it soon has no value left; you sure you want that?

I've been thinking about whether "$some_country rape gangs" seems racist to me. I've come down on "yes". The reason might seem odd. But it ocurred to me that if you want to use immigration to reduce crime, including rape, the obvious solution is to ban all male immigration. That shocked me because it seems so wildly discriminatory. Yes, most violent crimes are committed by men. But very few men commit violent crimes.…

Your solution of banning male immigration makes perfect sense to me. Maybe not ban it entirely but at least ensure a 1-1 ratio of men to women (male surplus has a tendency to turn countries into shitholes).

Disallowing someone from immigrating is not a punishment because there is no right to immigration anyway. In fact I believe we should go even further and see immigrants as investments. If the immigrant is unlikely to have a net positive tax contribution (or at least not being a rapist, for a more realistic target), I don't see any reason to allow him or her to be here. If you accept this idea, there is nothing wrong with training a neural network on characteristics of existing immigrants to predict the future value of a particular potential immigrant.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#125

Post by BoredPositron »

simianparrot wrote: post #107
McGlockenshire wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow! When that one DHH blog went around the other day, I didn't actually pay attention to who the author was. All I saw was yet another bigoted rant and just skimmed it and rolled my eyes. (e: here it is to save people the effort: https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64 ) I should not have skimmed it. From your link: > In the same post he praises Tommy Robinson (actual name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-…

As a fellow Scandinavian, DHH is just writing what the vast majority of us think. And it isn’t racist. That word is being misused until it soon has no value left; you sure you want that?

What's the right use for the word and the value of it in your mind? You are commenting in circles in this thread and you could clarify it easily.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#126

Post by byroot »

baggy_trough wrote: post #8

Locking out a guy like David Rodriguez (the main person I see doing bundler commits) in a dramatic fashion just seems like absolute craziness. I can't fathom doing it without a very good reason, which has yet to be revealed if it exists.

He's specifically among the 3 people still owner of the bundler gem [0], they were 6 just a few weeks ago [1]

[0] https://rubygems.org/gems/bundler

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20250824033341/https://rubygems....

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#127

Post by rramon »

fwip wrote: post #45
jmcgough wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found this helpful in explaining what's happened: https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/22/ruby_central_rubygems... Sounds like they made some really big changes and put zero effort into communicating to people who've spent 10+ years working on the project.

Thanks - that was helpful indeed. From there, I also found the linked post by Tekin Süleyman ( https://tekin.co.uk/2025/09/the-ruby-community-has-a-dhh-pro... ) to be informative.

Tekin, what makes a Turk less white than a Greek or Spaniard?

If it's cultural (religion, music/sports related subcultures and codes) then it's chosen. Nobody can force you into a subculture in the West. As soon as you turn 18 you can essentially do what you want, most likely even way before that.

You can chose your subculture, how you dress, style your hair, talk and are read by the mainstream society. Actual racists go by skin color and ignore your cultural choices, fuck them.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#128

Post by pjc50 »

kgwgk wrote: post #115
McGlockenshire wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow! When that one DHH blog went around the other day, I didn't actually pay attention to who the author was. All I saw was yet another bigoted rant and just skimmed it and rolled my eyes. (e: here it is to save people the effort: https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64 ) I should not have skimmed it. From your link: > In the same post he praises Tommy Robinson (actual name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-…

> To all of that he ads a dash of Islamophobia, citing “Pakistani rape gangs” as one of the reasons for the unrest, repeating a weaponised trope borne from a long since discredited report Were independent inquiries also repeating weaponised tropes from long since discredited reports? “By far the majority of perpetrators were described as 'Asian' by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage…

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/29/officer-raped-ro...

The ultimate problems lie in the police: they are generally terrible at handling rape cases, and in this case there are claims that they were actively complicit in some of the rapes.

Using the actions of some members of an ethnic minority to justify .. well, any action against people who were not actually personally involved, is textbook discrimination.

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#129

Post by pjc50 »

simianparrot wrote: post #117
scuff3d wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The venn diagram of actual racists and crazy racists is a circle.

So if I understand correctly, people want a state for the Palestinian people. But they do not accept that people want a state for the Danish people. Is that it?

Ethnostates are a terrible idea regardless of whose ethnicity we're talking about, because they can only be maintained by violence.

The state of Palestine is an answer to the question of "what nationality do the residents of Gaza and the West Bank have?"

Re: A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

#130

Post by maleldil »

simianparrot wrote: post #122
watwut wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word racism is not diluted. It is that just some full on racists feel like it says something negative and thus don't want the label put on racists stuff they like.

So do you consider what the Danish PM said racist? > There are really a lot of us Danes who believed that when people came to this ‘world’s best country’ and were given such good opportunities, they would integrate. They would become Danish, and they would never, ever harm our society. All of us who thought that way have been wrong. That's objectively observed reality in Denmark. And in Scandinavia in general. It's n…

Danish PM's comment is about integration. You're mischaracterising it. I'd say it's pro immigration, not what you're trying to spin it as.

"We want immigrants to integrate" is not the same as "we don't want immigrants", which is the point you're trying to make.

Post reply on HN