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

GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 845 posts

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#211

Post by PopeOfNope »

ectoplasm wrote: post #196
PopeOfNope wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. What's your point?

OP used the term "free speech" which is a legal term that in the US refers to 1st amendment protections around expression. Well, free speech laws don't apply to me on your property. It is legal for you to tell me to shut up or get out.

Yes. Now, imagine you're in OP's grocery store. It's still private property, but he provides a public service out of it. Can he still prevent you from shouting at him? Do free speech laws cover privately owned public spaces?

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#212

Post by jamie_ca »

Animats wrote: post #191
thedz wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. This isn't censorship of the type that is illegal or not allowed. It is a private company deciding a word was inappropriate. 2. It seems like most in this comment thread agree that this action, as a singular act, is a good thing. The word was offensive. Github asked the repo to change it. They did. The end. 3. As for the larger context, the problem with the frequent use of slippery slope arguments and cries of "ce…

"This isn't censorship of the type that is illegal or not allowed. It is a private company deciding a word was inappropriate." As a Github user, that kind of thinking worries me. Google Code went away, and Sourceforge started packaging adware and spyware with other people's projects. They could do this because "they were a private company". Now Github's management is starting to throw their weight around. We now need…

You mean like https://gitlab.com/ or http://gogs.io/ or http://getgitorious.com/ or any of the other open source git servers that you can install on your own machine?

Not to say that Github couldn't close down some of their API endpoints in the future (like reading issues/comments), but they're one of the web services I use that I _don't_ actually fear lock-in on.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#213

Post by anon3_ »

thedz wrote: post #116
CoryG89 wrote: post #40

For people who don't see what's wrong here. The issue is not about whether the word 'retard' is or is not offensive to anyone. You need to consider that GitHub currently hosts a large percentage of the web's open source repositories. This is censorship plain and simple, something that IMO has no place in open source. The issue is that there are plenty of things some people might find offensive on GitHub but you dont…

1. This isn't censorship of the type that is illegal or not allowed. It is a private company deciding a word was inappropriate. 2. It seems like most in this comment thread agree that this action, as a singular act, is a good thing. The word was offensive. Github asked the repo to change it. They did. The end. 3. As for the larger context, the problem with the frequent use of slippery slope arguments and cries of "ce…

> 4. If or when Github actually does something truly abusive of their power to censor, then I'll worry.

The discretion in this case was already arbitrary and is cause to worry.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#214

Post by zobzu »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #164
mehwoot wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information The argument is it isn't suppression because as a private company, people can still choose to engage in that speech elsewhere. The government can actually make laws to stop people from saying certain things in any context. When a private company does it, they can only do it in the medium they control and for people who choose to use th…

From the same wiki article you're quoting from - "Governments, private organizations and individuals may engage in censorship" It's simply incorrect to say that private companies cannot engage in censorship.

This is the internet, where retarded people redefine the words and their world view as they see fit.

Most comments and up/down votes are about what people like/dislike not about what's either right, interesting or insightful.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#215

Post by hhandoko »

ryandrake wrote: post #184
thedz wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first three questions/answers, summarized, is that "Github ethically and legally removed an offensive word" Should they? Yes. I feel slippery slope arguments get brought up way too much sometimes. Every issue is turning into a binary all-or-nothing ordeal, with no room for nuance or context. As long as what Github did is 1. ethical (removing a generally accepted as offensive word), 2. legal, then I see no proble…

It would also be ethical and legal to comb through their hosted content to remove any other words, but I'd argue it's a ret...er...wasteful use of their resources. Also, I must have missed the memo when 'retarded' became "generally accepted as an offensive word". Are "stupid" "moronic" and "idiotic" also offensive? I guess I need to keep up with the times--as soon as I think I've figured out the list of everything th…

If you direct it at a particular person, then your intent is to offend, and by all means it is offensive.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#216

Post by foiboitoi »

ectoplasm wrote: post #196
PopeOfNope wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. What's your point?

OP used the term "free speech" which is a legal term that in the US refers to 1st amendment protections around expression. Well, free speech laws don't apply to me on your property. It is legal for you to tell me to shut up or get out.

Free speech isn't just a legality. It's a valuable principal that's stood the test of time of being one of the few core features of functional societies.

Free speech is a value that we should all uphold regardless whether it legally applies or not. So stop making excuses for bad corporate behaviour.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#217

Post by brandonmenc »

Zikes wrote: post #171
brandonmenc wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" When it comes down to it, no one would really do this.

You don't think that people would defend to the death one of the basic principles of human rights? To be clear, I'm not saying that Github censoring "retarded" is a human rights issue, but as long as we've gone off the rails let's see where the train comes to a stop.

> You don't think that people would defend to the death one of the basic principles of human rights?

A progressive making that claim would never take a bullet so that someone could fly the Confederate flag, for example. It's just not going to happen.

They may fight to defend the 1st Amendment, but that's easy because it's a proxy behind which exists all the specific instances of speech they would find horrible along with the speech they hold dear.

People making the claim probably mean the latter, but the wording implies something more specific, presumably for effect.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#218

Post by tomp »

austenallred wrote: post #48
avolcano wrote: post #6

Fine with me. It's an offensive term and GitHub has every right to police their service and ban content like this. Am I supposed to be concerned by this, and if so, why?

I don't know, I guess I'm supposed to consider it censorship and be outraged or something? Some people feel entitled to say what they want on any platform they choose and cry "censorship" when their offensive speech is removed. My guess is GH doesn't actively monitor things like this, but someone complained. So they're removing it, and it's just a matter of time before we hear a thousand "slippery slope" arguments.

Anyone who is offended by the word "retard" is an idiot (pun intended).

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#219

Post by JoshTriplett »

aerovistae wrote: post #147
JoshTriplett wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's as if we as humans have some kind of context-sensitive language recognition capability, and can tell when a word is being used as a slur or if it has entirely unrelated meanings. We're slightly smarter than regular expressions. And yes, I'd fully expect Github to ban those too.

I'm sorry, but I believe that allowing even one idea to be banned from discourse is the first step towards a system where someone like Edward Snowden has to find asylum in Russia. I don't believe in censorship or hiding away what was really said or done. If anyone has a problem with this developer's language, they can boycott his repo.

Slurs aren't discourse, or even the start of discourse. And removing them has nothing to do with pervasive surveillance.

> If anyone has a problem with this developer's language, they can boycott his repo.

Github did, and they did. And then someone decided to stir up trouble by posting it as though people should be offended by what Github did, rather than applauding them.

Github can do as they like on their own resources. If you don't like it, host your own, and welcome everyone who doesn't like to be decent to other people. See how it goes.

No matter what you do, you'll exclude people and silence ideas. Either you exclude hateful people, or you exclude people who don't enjoy hatefulness. Pick one.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#220

Post by EugeneOZ »

shawnps wrote: post #21
general_failure wrote: post #13

Is there a list of objectionable words/language that one is not supposed to use? A quick search on the f-work gives thousands of hits on github.

Interestingly, a search for "retard" in code on GitHub yields over 200,000 results: https://github.com/search?q=retard&type=Code&utf8=%E2%9C%93 Not sure what made this particular case different.

I don't understand why they don't filter it on upload stage ("push"). "git push" > "sorry, can't push because of words: [list of words here]". Is it more difficult than later disable whole repo because of one stupid joke?
Post reply on HN