156
submitted 9 months ago by Gargari@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 146 points 9 months ago

It's the one with a dev that thinks that replacing "he" by "they" is political propaganda?

Yeah, no thanks.

[-] billgamesh@lemmy.ml 41 points 9 months ago

Thanks for the heads up. Not worth the time

[-] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Chill. Read the cited sources. It's someone asking the community to not use the github forum for discussing the completely irrelevant topic. It's not a fucking open forum it's for developers to use as a resource. I don't care if the person was giving out a $1,000,000 to anyone that commented, find an appropriate place to post your comments. I saw nothing against the topic itself but a bunch of angry responses. I mean if you read and are like na fuck that dude than 100% that's your take but that's the thing, its YOUR take. I hate seeing people so quick to draw the fuck this or fuck that card from absolutely zero rhetoric than what an anonymous internet comment said.

[-] toastal@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

Treating social media as social media makes sense. If you don’t want your issue tracker to turn out like this, then stop using the social media code forge.

[-] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Can you provide some context?

Edit: I found the context. Here and here.

[-] Nima@leminal.space 36 points 9 months ago

maybe I'm not seeing where the smoking gun is, here. I see a guy saying something akin to "can we not do this here in the github please"

and then I see a bunch of people blowing up and yelling about "dehumanization" over it.

...why is this such a huge deal exactly?

[-] WldFyre@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago

Changing "he" to "they" isn't a political change, or shouldn't be if you're not a fucking shithead

[-] M500@lemmy.ml 11 points 9 months ago

Maybe I’m dumb, but I completely do not understand what the dev did to upset people.

I read the thread and I’m confused about it.

[-] shotgun_crab@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

People get upset over anything tbh

[-] enbyecho@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Can you provide some context?

This Mastodon post discusses it and has links to the PRs: https://ruby.social/@denis/112718132053579597

This one for SerenityOS shows Kling's response to a very minor and neutral change.

[-] geography082@lemm.ee 30 points 9 months ago

What the fuck have to do one thing with another. You people are so fucked up . You make drama from anything imaginable

[-] enbyecho@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

Kling is the one "making drama"

[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 28 points 9 months ago

for someone who can speak a language that lacks gendered pronouns, this "hysteria" over he/she/they is ridiculous!

[-] exu@feditown.com 16 points 9 months ago

As someone who speaks a language with gendered pronouns but no neutral option, this is very awkward to deal with.

[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago

yes, it's awkward for the "individual" who is longing for reliable expression

it also seems to be awkward for people who can't figure out the changes in the language they think as their own. They are irritated by their "disfigured" reflection

it's awkward for officials who need to make decisions (positive or negative) about the use of "inclusive" language

we give shape to languages and languages shape us

English could initially have neutral pronouns and people would be obliged to find other reasons to hate each other 🤷

[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

Well on the contrary you should understand it more. A gendered pronoun carries an idea of gender, and having a genderless pronoun frees the sentence of this gender assumption. Nothing very hard to understand.

[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago

that's what i thought i meant but thanks for the lesson I've never needed

even your comment is, for me, coming from that ridiculous tension

[-] Retiring@lemmy.ml 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Do you think there are no assholes working for google or mozilla? Assholes are everywhere. And fuck cancel culture.

Edit: I stand by what I said, you can downvote me all you want. It doesn’t matter to me one bit.

[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

Cancel culture, this far-right myth that fascists love so much. You forgot to continue and talk about freedom of speech and how you are a centrist.

[-] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Where is the anti pronoun shit though? I've only seen one cited link and it was asking not to use the forum for discussing irrelevant topics. Github forums are resources used by all levels of developers for finding answers for issues with open source no instruction manual software development. Nothing i saw was anti-gender or pronoun anything (didt read thru the responding comments from users but why would they reflect on the person in question? Am I missing something beyond what op commented without providing any rhyme, reason or resource for?

Edit: now I'm even more confused after reading a second commenter's link that shows they made the requested edit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 20 points 9 months ago

people can have different views. you might not like them but it's their views, not yours

[-] DrJenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube 39 points 9 months ago

And it's my view that we are free to dunk on people with bad views.

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago

i don't get why sane people would rather a person with good opinions over a free independent web browser, the latter just seems so much more valuable to me.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 9 months ago

@Jumuta@sh.itjust.works

@Gargari@lemmy.ml @Solumbran@lemmy.world @DrJenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube

This is sorta a hornets nest. On the one hand I get that when it comes to tech who cares about the persons personal life but on the other hand when it comes to free software there is a concern over the orgs or individuals that run them given the trust involved. Yes you can rely on the many eyes but you want to be confident of the org (or individual) to begin with.

[-] ormr@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

So you think you can draw a connection between someone's views on inclusive language and whether an individual or org can be trusted with software security.

I'm sorry but to me this line of thinking is bonkers. The two things have nothing to do with each other whatsoever. What if a conservative individual argued that they have trust issues with an open source project because it features inclusive language now? The person might argue that they don't understand why devs would devote their limited time to such cosmetics instead of focusing on code quality. How would you view this argument? On Lemmy it would probably be ridiculed, and rightfully so. Yet it's the same line of thinking that I see if I interpreted your comment correctly.

[-] DrJenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube 11 points 9 months ago

Look, the dev is a reactionary. He lists that the browser is unstable and intended for devs. So IF I were to use it, that would mean reporting issues and/or fixing issues myself. I'm not interested in working with a reactionary. So I will not be using this browser. You're welcome to use the browser if you want. At this time, I'm not interested.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 9 months ago

Thats because you don't view it as a moral failing. How would racist language rank. What about nazi stuff. I mean none of that technically effects trustworthiness for running an org. Well ah. unless your the particular thing.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ahal@lemmy.ca 11 points 9 months ago

Did the OP say they couldn't have different views? You must have replied to the wrong comment.

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

isn't that what they implied?

I'm fine with solumbran seeing the dev's opinions as "wrong", I just find how they base their whole view of the project on that single small disagreement makes them seem like a shortsighted dumbass

[-] ahal@lemmy.ca 10 points 9 months ago

Oh that's not at all what they implied. They implied you shouldn't use the project based on the author's opinions. That's very different from implying the author isn't entitled to their opinions.

Boycotting the software doesn't infringe on the author's rights to have a shitty opinion. It's called consequences for being an asshole.

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They implied you shouldn’t use the project based on the author’s opinions.

that's what i said??

Boycotting the software doesn’t infringe on the author’s rights to have a shitty opinion.

how am i saying this? i'm saying that the guy is shortsighted for telling people to boycott the software just bc of the dev's opinions

i'm not arguing about the arbitary rights of authors, i'm just saying that boycotting isn't an efficient use of resources

[-] enbyecho@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

people can have different views. you might not like them but it’s their views, not yours

Yes, they can. And I can also view their views with disdain... or even horror and choose not to support their efforts, whatever they may be.

What you are really saying here is that you to some degree don't disagree with Kling and so it's this particular view you find acceptable to let pass. If it were something like "people should be fine eating small children" you might react differently.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 9 months ago

He is right, hey shouldn't push a political agenda. They can fork it if they don't like it. It is his choice and he is the one putting in the work, not you.

[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago

Refusing the change is pushing a political agenda too. But I guess it helps seeing which agenda you prefer ;)

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 9 months ago

Well it isn't something that should be discussed in a Github issue.

[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

And where then? It is about changing a part of the software, that fits quite clearly an issue/pull request

[-] Kiwi@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

I’m sorry but “project documentation should not be discussed in a GitHub issue or pr” is what you’re going with?? Where the fuck else would you discuss it?

[-] kugmo@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago

Based Andreas KING

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
156 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

37250 readers
391 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS