GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard' • Hacker News Board

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

#731

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:12 PM UTC

kefka wrote: post #665

shkkmo wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feminism is not to blame. Feminism is wonderful and empowering ideology. There is a distinct difference between the ideology of feminism and the behavior of a specific group of feminists. Lumping the two together like that is like blaming Islam for terrorists.

Feminism, by its very name, is a sexist philosophy. And according to feminists, sexism (mainly patriarchy) is bad. Unless it's feminism. Feminism -> Feminine -> Female Definition of -ism: a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.

Etymology and definition are two different things, and the latter can not be reliably inferred from the former.

Your argument presumes an inference of the definition from the etymology, which would perhaps not be an unreasonable approach if you were a future archeologist stumbling on the fragmentary remains of our society and the only information you had for interpreting the modern English word "feminism" was an idea of its linguistic roots.

But it is unreasonable when you actually have access to the modern world in which it is used.

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

#732

Post by kenrikm » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:15 PM UTC

1stranger wrote: post #709

nols wrote: post #698

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they really don't. Retard has historically been used to classify the mentally disabled, it literally was a definition. Using it to call someone mentally disabled as an insult is more offensive to the mentally disabled than calling someone stupid. That's the issue. You're free to use retard in your code as much as you want, apparently not on Github though. They, as a private company, are allowed to pick and choose…

Idiot has been historically used to mean a mentally disabled person: > idiot: MEDICINE (archaic): a mentally handicapped person. Google "euphemism treadmill" for more info.

This is one example [1]

[1] http://englishcowpath.blogspot.com/2011/06/euphemism-treadmi...

Just switch back to imbecile for the next 100 years? Problem solved? Clearly not, the underlying issue has nothing to do with the word but meanings that people attach to them and that is something that will not be fixed by outlawing the word as the meanings attached will shift to a new word.

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

#733

Post by kefka » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:17 PM UTC

pekk wrote: post #724

kefka wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in the case of GitHub censorship, it really is feminism and social justice warrior garbage. But I might be a white (-3 points) guy (-2 points) so you have to balance that in with the cited facts about the rug. I think it's pretty clear.

I think Github is itself mostly white guys. Also, most of the people being labeled SJWs on the relevant Github issue are white guys. So this isn't about whether you are a white guy or being defensive about being a white guy.

> I think Github is itself mostly white guys.

Why should race or sex even be a part of the equation of "Hire or Not?"

But don't worry. Github hired a bunch of women for their women-only area, Passion Projects. They only hire women, so it's a "Safe Space".

... and it appeases the feminists so that we don't have to hold to high standards of programming. They do the frilly 'social media' productions because you know "women are good at social".

Edit: And that's the problem with specialized woman-only hiring procedures. They look good from a PR aspect as well as an appeasement angle, but the message they deliver is "Women aren't as good as men, so we have 'special' programs for them."

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

#734

Post by eli_gottlieb » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:18 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #651

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you are hurt by certain words doesn't actually grant you quite enough moral authority to call up a rage-mob and apply it to the face of every entity that acts as a medium to provide an open, public space in which some people say the words that hurt you. There is real harm in rendering public space hostage to the moral outrage of self-selected groups and individuals. It's nowhere near the harm caused by…

Censorship is a fact of life and human experience. Calling for its eradication is to call for the erasure of a fundamental aspect of human cognition. So we're going to apply the principle sensibly. The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on…

>The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on the site.

That's not actually the issue at hand. Github isn't actually supposed to communicate anything at all on their site, good or bad. They're supposed to act as a platform and a common carrier for others. This requires that they not be subject to a heckler's veto, as anyone can understand if they stroll down to a university campus and look at what happens when an unpopular political group attempts to hold a meeting in a classroom (eg: they get blockaded and shouted down by hecklers).

And by "unpopular", I don't mean "Hey let's throw slurs around for the lulz", I mean, "Anything to do with the Middle East, or the Radical Students' Union, or the Campus Republicans, or anything to do with the Middle East."

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

#735

Post by savage884 » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:22 PM UTC

sytse wrote: post #403

It is so hard to decide where to draw the line. At GitLab.com we face decisions like this too and it is impossible to please everyone. We have a code of conduct https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBU... for contributing to GitLab but not for the SaaS service. You can't allow everything and you can't ban everything, so everything always is a judgement call. It would be nice to vote on these thing…

Wow. Good to know. I actually just created an account at gitlab.com earlier today because of this. Now I know that was a waste of my time.

You want to know where to draw the line? Draw it at staying out of other peoples' business.

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

#736

Post by sytse » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:27 PM UTC

savage884 wrote: post #735

sytse wrote: post #403

It is so hard to decide where to draw the line. At GitLab.com we face decisions like this too and it is impossible to please everyone. We have a code of conduct https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBU... for contributing to GitLab but not for the SaaS service. You can't allow everything and you can't ban everything, so everything always is a judgement call. It would be nice to vote on these thing…

Wow. Good to know. I actually just created an account at gitlab.com earlier today because of this. Now I know that was a waste of my time. You want to know where to draw the line? Draw it at staying out of other peoples' business.

I'm sorry to hear you feel this way. Staying out of other peoples' business was not an option with GamerGate, and I'm afraid it will not be an option in the future. I would love a clear choice in these matters but I don't see one.

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

#737

Post by kefka » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:27 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #729

kefka wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feminism, is by definition, anti-sexist. Really now. Sexism in all of its forms is bad. That includes feminism AND masculinism. > While the term 'feminism' does come from the root 'feminine', it refers to an umbrella of ideologies that includes many advocates of equal rights for men as well as for women. Citation needed for italicized text.

> Really now. Many (most?) definitions of feminism are along the lines of "supporting equal rights for men and women" or "equality between the sexes". Feminism is an umbrella term for a group of ideologies, some of who do not agree with either of those definitions. In that sense my statement is not accurate. However it is still far more accurate that your attempt to use the latin root of the word to define its meanin…

> Feminism is an umbrella term for a group of ideologies, some of who do not agree with either of those definitions. In that sense my statement is not accurate. However it is still far more accurate that your attempt to use the latin root of the word to define its meaning while ignoring its use and history.

In other words, you just keep moving the endposts so nothing is really "Feminism" unless you agree to it. Got it.

> Here's one: I am a feminist and I support equal rights for men as well women.

Repeat after me: The plural of Anecdote is not 'Data'

Feminism only sees to female rights in reference to 'leveling the playing field'. Any other "but they really also do ..." is just being disingenuous and deceitful.

If you support equal rights for men and women, that's egalitarianism.

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

#738

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:30 PM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #734

KirinDave wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship is a fact of life and human experience. Calling for its eradication is to call for the erasure of a fundamental aspect of human cognition. So we're going to apply the principle sensibly. The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on…

>The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on the site. That's not actually the issue at hand. Github isn't actually supposed to communicate anything at all on their site, good or bad. They're supposed to act as a platform and a common carrie…

> Github isn't actually supposed to communicate anything at all on their site, good or bad. They're supposed to act as a platform and a common carrier for others.

"Supposed" by whom?

Arguably, they might be analogous to a common carrier with regard to their paid services. Their free services appear to be provided on the basis of mutual benefit -- the consumers of those free services get the services, Github gets the promotional benefit of hosting the services.

At least in the case of the latter, Github has a clear incentive to view the exchange differently when the content exposed by the repositories in question is, in Github's view, inconsistent with the image that Github wants to present, and seems to me to have a clear moral right to decide whether or not to make the exchange in consideration of that basis, among other factors.

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

#739

Post by JoshTriplett » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:37 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #722

JoshTriplett wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there's a clear objective line there. And while it'd be difficult to teach a computer that line, a human can understand it just fine.

Objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. --- Please, PLEASE try and tell me that definition is compatible with a discussion of "which words hurt people's feelings."

You don't have to agree with a criteria to be able to apply it objectively; it just has to be something that can be evaluated by anyone to come up with the same answer. You can't objectively evaluate whether art looks good; you can only get subjective answers and attempt to find consensus. You can objectively determine if a word is a noun, verb, adjective, etc (given context, as some words can fall in several categories). And given context, you can objectively determine if a word is a slur. (Personally, I avoid both slurs and insults, but github only bans the former, not the latter, and that seems like a reasonable position to take.)

So, to be clear: there's an objective criteria for "what is a slur"; there's no objective criteria for "what is acceptable" or "what is offensive". But in any case, a hosting company is hardly required to provide an objective criteria for what they accept; it's nice if the rules they supply can be objectively evaluated, but that doesn't mean their choice of which rules to apply needs to be objective.

In any case, I have no further interest in arguing with you; I doubt you're going to stop being outraged that someone won't give you a free platform for hatefulness.

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

#740

Post by KirinDave » Wed, Jul 29, 2015, 8:43 PM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #734

KirinDave wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship is a fact of life and human experience. Calling for its eradication is to call for the erasure of a fundamental aspect of human cognition. So we're going to apply the principle sensibly. The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on…

>The simple truth no one here wants to admit while they argue slippery slopes and excluded middles about how the only harm worth noting is total genocide: there is no real communicative value for github in allowing slurs on the site. That's not actually the issue at hand. Github isn't actually supposed to communicate anything at all on their site, good or bad. They're supposed to act as a platform and a common carrie…

> They're supposed to act as a platform and a common carrier for others.

This is your projected mission. They've never claimed they should, would or even CAN do this. Feel free to find another vendor in the marketplace that will continue to allow you to protect racial slurs on the dubious mask of free speech.

But it's worth noting the case in question WAS just "throw some slurs around because we're just massively insensitive."