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

When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 78 posts

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#61

Post by Quarrelsome »

tptacek wrote: post #57
Quarrelsome wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now this is what I'm much more interested in. Security of the code is a off-the-charts more important than what the package happens to be called. ;) Thanks for the insight. The article suggests the author is upset due to controversy due to the name but I assume her anguish is more due to the forking of the library and what she feels is the removal of her credit?

No; Github gave her credit immediately on starting the project. She was irritated that they chose to fork her code at all, and disapproved of many of the changes. But her code, as Github found it, was absolutely not safe to run on a popular public web app.

This is so much more of a better story than the OP. Thanks for filling in the gaps, much appreciated.

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#62

Post by thyrsus »

dotBen wrote: post #31
Mz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, thanks. No, I'm genuinely naive in that regard. I got married young and raised two special needs kids who needed all my time. So for many years, if it wasn't appropriate viewing for a small child, I was not exposed to it. And that's exactly my point: I'm fairly well read and had no idea this was something that would be interpreted this negatively. So perhaps the authors didn't either. And when you start a convers…

[I] had no idea this was something that would be interpreted this negatively. So perhaps the authors didn't either. The original author, when challenged, renamed the package to 'Misaka', an Anime character portrayed as an 11-year old who is often depicted graphically from an upskirt angle (its all pretty unsavory, frankly) . Point is... original author clearly knew what he was doing with these package names.

My understanding is that the original author, feeling betrayed, has abandoned her open source project, allowing the once collaborator and suggester of the name "upskirt" to make his suggestion of the replacement name "misaka".

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#63

Post by Mz »

scott_s wrote: post #59
Mz wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible, yes. But so absurdly unlikely that I find it strange to seriously suggest the package maintainer did not know what he was doing. There has already been evidence posted here that the woman involved in the project, like me, had some idea it was kind of risque but no idea just how negatively it would be viewed. So far, no one has posted any definitive evidence to the contrary -- it is all circumstantial. And I…

We're talking about two different things. You're referring to the female author of Panyshot, who was a non-native English speaker who did not know the full meaning of "pantyshot". I'm talking about the author of Upskirt who is a native English speaker and changed the name of his package to that of a young anime character famous for upskirt shots.

We're talking about two different things.

I think we are talking about two different things only I would frame it as "I'm talking about assumption of guilt (and how rampant and problematic that is) vs actual proof" and you seem to be talking about probability. Given how this conversation has gone so far, there is probably no point in trying to further clarify my intent or meaning on that point.

Peace.

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#64

Post by thyrsus »

Mz wrote: post #58
thyrsus wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I upvoted you because I think your description of the normal response to this kind of unintentionally provocative language is indeed normal. I speculate that you were downvoted, because the incident in question is fairly clearly an aberration from the normal course of events; an aberration in which someone who wanted to be playful now feels betrayed.

I speculate that you were downvoted, because the incident in question is fairly clearly an aberration from the normal course of events; an aberration in which someone who wanted to be playful now feels betrayed. Thanks for your feedback, but I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Care to clarify what is supposed to be so clear? :-/

I believe the following clearly describes an aberration - an exception - to the normal course of events. In the normal course, those who use language more provocative than intended quietly revert it. In the incident under discussion (quoting from the original referenced article):

"She, not being a native English-speaker, had accepted on trust a foreign-language name for her library. According to Holden, the revelation - and the attention to her unknowing complicity - brought about with the name was so uncomfortable for her that she quit working in open source altogether."

Then, later

"Smit [a collaborator with the original author] re-named Pantyshot/Upskirt after a Japanese name. Not just any name, but popularly belonging to an Anime (adult comics) character whose superpower is electricity, and is controversial due to notorious upskirt shots of the character - most especially as she is depicted as being 11 years old."

As for my adjective "playful", I applied it to the situation because of this quote attributed to the original author:

"I did know the sexual and voyeurism connotations of the word “upskirt” and I was very hesitant to actually use it. For the record, my limited grasp of slang English means that I genuinely had no idea where it lied on the offensiveness scale, and whether it could be covered up as something more harmless (and have it be more of an innuendo than of a basic offensive word)."

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#65

Post by Mz »

thyrsus wrote: post #64
Mz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I speculate that you were downvoted, because the incident in question is fairly clearly an aberration from the normal course of events; an aberration in which someone who wanted to be playful now feels betrayed. Thanks for your feedback, but I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Care to clarify what is supposed to be so clear? :-/

I believe the following clearly describes an aberration - an exception - to the normal course of events. In the normal course, those who use language more provocative than intended quietly revert it. In the incident under discussion (quoting from the original referenced article): "She, not being a native English-speaker, had accepted on trust a foreign-language name for her library. According to Holden, the revelatio…

Thanks.

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#66

Post by smosher »

dotBen wrote: post #48
duodecim wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because it would be hypocrite to rate the importance of the name higher than the value of the code, and then nevertheless try to steal the code from the guy who spent all the time developing it. The guy wrote the code and gave it a tongue in cheek name. Deal with it. What the hell is wrong with this world? Moral outrage in the sub-urbian latte crowd? Pillows not fluffed enough?

Since when is forking open source code 'stealing' it? Oh boy, what can of worms am I opening here...

Since when is forking open source code 'stealing' it?

According to the FSF? Usually when you do something with it that RMS doesn't like. GPLv3 anyone? (Sorry I couldn't resist.)

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#68

Post by scott_s »

Mz wrote: post #63
scott_s wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about two different things. You're referring to the female author of Panyshot, who was a non-native English speaker who did not know the full meaning of "pantyshot". I'm talking about the author of Upskirt who is a native English speaker and changed the name of his package to that of a young anime character famous for upskirt shots.

We're talking about two different things. I think we are talking about two different things only I would frame it as "I'm talking about assumption of guilt (and how rampant and problematic that is) vs actual proof" and you seem to be talking about probability. Given how this conversation has gone so far, there is probably no point in trying to further clarify my intent or meaning on that point. Peace.

I meant we were talking about two different people - I was not talking about the non-native English speaker who clearly did not know the full meaning of the word.

I submit that evidence (I hesitate to use the word "proof" since it can have implications of certainty) is all about probability. You have to weigh the probabilities, always. With the native English speaker, I find that his words on the matter make it overwhelmingly likely that he knew exactly what he was doing. I'm not assuming guilt, I'm concluding guilt.

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#69

Post by [deleted] »

scott_s wrote: post #59
Mz wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible, yes. But so absurdly unlikely that I find it strange to seriously suggest the package maintainer did not know what he was doing. There has already been evidence posted here that the woman involved in the project, like me, had some idea it was kind of risque but no idea just how negatively it would be viewed. So far, no one has posted any definitive evidence to the contrary -- it is all circumstantial. And I…

We're talking about two different things. You're referring to the female author of Panyshot, who was a non-native English speaker who did not know the full meaning of "pantyshot". I'm talking about the author of Upskirt who is a native English speaker and changed the name of his package to that of a young anime character famous for upskirt shots.

[deleted]

Re: When software offends, the pantyshot package controversy

#70

Post by brigade »

pyre wrote: post #27
dotBen wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My familiarity with the terms is not from porn but from celebrities who, whoops, get caught flashing their panties inadvertently in public. So to my mind this was relatively innocent activity Famous female celebrity gets out of car, inadvertently flashes underwear due to short skirt, photographer snaps said inadvertent underwear flash and publishes results for titillation and ridicule. Innocent on the part of the cel…

She also characterized it as 'illegal,' which may be the case for hidden cameras, but I doubt it is the case for celebrities in a public space.

In the US, it's illegal in "circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place."
Post reply on HN