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

The SQLite Code of Ethics

sqlite.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 408 posts

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#281

Post by ticviking »

wyager wrote: post #40
ripley12 wrote: post #24

I'm not religious but I've always liked this; it's fun to think of the SQLite developers as a small monastery. If monasteries can produce beer for the world (see: the Trappists), why not software?

If software engineering was available as a monastic vocation, we'd probably have a lot of significantly higher-quality software available. I would much rather use something written by a stylite with an esolang compiler than shat out by 100 poorly-coordinated javascript devs at MEGACORP.

I’ve often wondered at the validity of pursing a vocation as an Oblate and supporting myself by consulting and providing software “lovingly made by monks at prayer”

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#282

Post by astrange »

ticviking wrote: post #8
ThalesX wrote: post #3

Hmm, is this some sort of Meta I’m missing? It feels strange to mix so many cultural ‘suggestions’ with a database product. > Listen willingly to holy reading. > Devote yourself frequently to prayer. > Daily in your prayers, with tears and sighs, confess your past sins to God, and amend them for the future. Anyway, sqlite is a good product and I don’t even mind all that much to have a code of Ethics associated to it,…

The point is that the other codes of conduct often embed other particular cultural suggestions and assumptions, but since they are those of your own you don't notice them as jarringly as those of medieval Christendom.

I don’t think that is the point. I do think everyone takes it as the point though.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#283

Post by ticviking »

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #162
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno about monastic programming getting a lot of takers. Don't forget that there's usually a vow of poverty involved; fully loaded Macbook Pros or decked out 16 core Threadripper workstations are not part of the picture.

However, a communal Mac Pro may be part of the infrastructure. It's a vow of individual poverty, but that doesn't mean the monastery itself does not contain riches that its monks have access to but do not privately own.

The vow of poverty tends to mean not accumulating real estate or a retirement account. The tools of a trade and other personal necessities are allowed.

Different monasteries enforce this different ways

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#284

Post by astrange »

ohCh6zos wrote: post #28
ThalesX wrote: post #3

Hmm, is this some sort of Meta I’m missing? It feels strange to mix so many cultural ‘suggestions’ with a database product. > Listen willingly to holy reading. > Devote yourself frequently to prayer. > Daily in your prayers, with tears and sighs, confess your past sins to God, and amend them for the future. Anyway, sqlite is a good product and I don’t even mind all that much to have a code of Ethics associated to it,…

A Code of Conduct was forced on them by dictate, so they did the right thing and made the process transparently absurd while also complying. Edit: The unspoken part of the demand was a 'progressive' CoC.

I don’t think it’s meant to be absurd and I do think he actually believes it.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#285

Post by astrange »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #220
teakettle42 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So a few bad apples has ruined the whole idea in your mind? It’s not a few. They’re primarily a tool for bad actors to secure institutional power. However, even if we take the surface-level arguments for a code of conduct in good faith, the entire concept is rooted in the premise that a healthy community arises out of strictly codifying social norms and permissible beliefs, imbuing a central, unaccountable authorit…

Without clear boundaries around conduct many communities become toxic. In gaming (playing and related projects) for example it pushes out girls and women, or at least to hide their gender. Forums have long had rules, spoken or unspoken. Making them more explicit is helpful IME.

The point of explicit forum rules is more to control the mods than the users. Users don’t read them, they just pick up tacit knowledge from what gets moderated.

The most useful thing you could have in a CoC would be declaring who’s responsible for making decisions about it.

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#286

Post by edgyquant »

doctor_eval wrote: post #197
bcrosby95 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works if you don't label half the population as intolerant.

It's not about labels. Speech that singles other people or groups out for different treatment or is otherwise racist, sexist, etc is intolerant. In a just society, we simply ask that one makes one's point without throwing specific groups under the proverbial bus.

This is a misunderstanding of the paradox of tolerance https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=31889018

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#288

Post by worthless-trash »

doctor_eval wrote: post #248
Tao3300 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Speech that singles other people or groups out for different treatment or is otherwise racist, sexist, etc is intolerant. I think most people can get on board with that. The trouble comes when people start berating others for using words/phrases like blacklist, sanity check, backlog grooming, master, and spaz - just to name a few. 99.9% of people who use these words do not possess the mens rea of bigotry or intoler…

I’m glad you think most people would agree with me, but your follow up example seems a bit unfortunate. You might not believe that language affects thought or behaviour, but saying so directly might arguably be a better way of making your point than singling out others who disagree with you.

Doesn't any example single out a specific object ?

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#289

Post by worthless-trash »

threatofrain wrote: post #230
smoe wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even when not accepting outside contributions, to fulfill their long term support commitment through 2050, they might have to make changes to their current core team.

If they do, then they will have to find people who embrace Christian spiritualism. That's going to be a lot easier than finding Lisp devs. Similarly, Christian institutions seek Christian employees and they fire those who cannot abide. Can't a software project be like a Christian church?

> That's going to be a lot easier than finding Lisp devs.

I'm attacked ! out with your intolerance :P

Re: The SQLite Code of Ethics

#290

Post by pclmulqdq »

kibwen wrote: post #243
generalizations wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> the developers are saying "we will treat you this way regardless of how you treat us" > in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance I have a lot more respect for people whose ethics are not conditional on the behavior of others.

I find that somewhat short-sighted. Let's use a different example. Imagine you live in a society that allows personal gun ownership. Obviously, in such a society you still don't want people running around shooting each other willy-nilly, so you make a law: shoot someone, go to jail. Now imagine someone pulls out a gun and shoots you. Result: you're dead, they go to jail. However, you'd really prefer not to be dead. S…

The issue I have with this is that you are effectively strawmanning this by proxying an individual's code of ethics with a society's code of laws.

The laws of a society are imposed on you regardless of whether you want them. A person's code of ethics is adopted by choice. The law you are referring to is only unjust because it is being imposed on everyone. A devout monk can be a good person, while a society that forces you to behave like a monk would be tyrannical. The coercion is the difference.

I think you would agree that a person whose code of ethics includes "if I shoot someone, I will promptly report myself to the police for murder" is not an unjust condition at all. However, a society that forces you to live that way in a gun-loving society would be very unjust indeed.

Post reply on HN