Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vulkan 1.2.153 Released As Development Switches To "Main"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    It is called "inefficiency".

    Say, all distrib using build script have to account for that useless change

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by s_j_newbury View Post
      1600s Norway was very much an active participant of the transatlantic slave trade. In any case, ending slavery has little do to with political correctness, and everything to to do with ethics and morality. Slavery was "politically correct" for long periods of history because it was economically expedient and normalised, the moral dilemmas rationalised away. Most people were afraid to bring it up in polite society due to the influence of Social Conformity.
      Norway was occupied by another country. We had our freedom taken away from us. The Danish King was our master. You're now really expanding on your previous stance, which seemed to be just an opposition to change, but now you're actively blaming the victim, which is the precise thing that the majority of people, at least in the Western world, wants to change.

      See where I'm going with this? You say slavery was politically correct because it was normalized. Do you really not see then why some people think it should be de-normalized by not being trivialized?

      You accuse me of being for censorship, which is much more offensive to me than you being asked to call your upstream "main" instead of "master". I'll remind you that _you_ are the one who's trying to prohibit others from using the terminology they wish to use.

      You speak as if the world must accommodate your need to use offensive language just to prove how free you are. But that's not how the world works. When you are unwilling to adjust when the world changes, you may some times find yourself not fitting in anymore. As I said, I'm perfectly ok with you suffering in that way, because the world has to change. If you want to stop and everyone else wants to move on, what do you expect to happen other than being left behind? But that is your choice; you're choosing to suffer. There are people who have no choice. My sympathy is with them and it always will be.

      But I have to ask, just because I'm curious; are you really a Vulkan contributor or are you just trying to tell everyone else what to say and what not to?

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by insilications View Post

        Just like whiny weak children. They will never grow up out of the victim mentality.

        Haidt & Lukianoff really called it when they identified woke culture as reverse CBT, a framework for actually inducing fragility and an external locus of control. Mental slaves to every nanoaggression. This is not kindness nor social justice.
        Yet you're the one that's whining...

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by jo-erlend View Post
          See where I'm going with this? You say slavery was politically correct because it was normalized. Do you really not see then why some people think it should be de-normalized by not being trivialized?
          If it's trivializing something that's been long since made illegal is debatable at best. It being offensive is also debatable at best seeing how nobody in this conversation is saying that they're either offended by it or that it trivializes something their ancestors suffered trough. Instead it's just a bunch of white people with white savior complexes going around claiming that the use of this allegory is so offensive and trivializes the suffering of PoC so they're being oh-so-progressive in championing their cause with this. Meanwhile the silence from the people whose rights are supposedly being fought for is deafening.

          You accuse me of being for censorship, which is much more offensive to me than you being asked to call your upstream "main" instead of "master". I'll remind you that _you_ are the one who's trying to prohibit others from using the terminology they wish to use.
          Now that's some pretty backwards logic right there. You're advocating for removal of terminology because it uses an allegory to a less-than-savory part of history and refusing to yield to your obvious censorship is somehow censorship? That's some pretty impressive mental contortions you're going trough there trying to insist refusing to yield to censorship is somehow censorship.

          But I have to ask, just because I'm curious; are you really a Vulkan contributor or are you just trying to tell everyone else what to say and what not to?
          Let me turn that around; Are you actually a PoC who's being offended and whose history is being "trivialized" by the use of this allegory or are you just some white guy with a white savior complex?
          "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

          Comment


          • #35
            @jo-erland, it occurs to me, especially after you accuse me of telling people what they can say and think, there is a fundamental difference in how we understand the concept of morality. I'm not telling anybody what to think or say.

            I posit there are two conflicting views:

            1. Moral behaviour is to act in accordance with cultural mores, social/group normative standards, laws and religious edicts. Moral judgement is received and applies universally

            2. Moral judgement is a process by which an aware individual deterimines an appropriate moral course of action through consideration of the novel circumstances which arise, possibly with guidance from the 1st view, but also through ones own values or moral compass

            I think you miss my point: Slavery is/was wrong because it's immoral (by my determination), not because it's politically incorrect. It only became de-normalised after courageous people stood up against the cultural mores of the time. That is individuals with their own awareness and moral compass stood against the dominant view. Political Correctness follows changing cultural mores.

            As I mention above, I suspect many people consider morality to be a function of social conformity, or religious dictact (which is effectively the same thing over longer timescales), perhaps you do? I'm not saying it's wrong, but it is problematic. It requires an absolute universal moral standard to exist, I personally don't believe that to be true.

            What you're suggesting is changing what is politically correct to conceptualise, or to be aware of, without changing the underlying reality. You're proposing that if we don't use certain words the concepts themselves go away, and the practice of slavery will end. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

            ..

            The extent of my involvement with Vulkan is with distribution packaging and debugging, I'm not a Vulkan developer but I did maintain a Gentoo Overlay for related packages before it was integrated. I have contributed to many free software projects since the 90s, but I'm not sure how relevant all that is.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by L_A_G View Post

              If it's trivializing something that's been long since made illegal is debatable at best. It being offensive is also debatable at best seeing how nobody in this conversation is saying that they're either offended by it or that it trivializes something their ancestors suffered trough.
              Why are you talking about ancestors when people are being sold as property as we speak?

              Now that's some pretty backwards logic right there. You're advocating for removal of terminology because it uses an allegory to a less-than-savory part of history and refusing to yield to your obvious censorship is somehow censorship?
              We are not talking about history. People are being sold right now. The idea that I am a victim of censorship whenever I choose to not say offensive things, is ridiculous. Aren't there many offensive things that you choose not to say? Does that mean you're in favor of censorship?

              I haven't said that I want Vulkan to change their terminology. I have said that I want them to have the freedom to do so and that I personally think that it's a good idea.

              [/QUOTE]

              That's some pretty impressive mental contortions you're going trough there trying to insist refusing to yield to censorship is somehow censorship.
              You are not refusing to yield to censorship. You're demanding that other people do not change the way they speak.

              Let me turn that around; Are you actually a PoC who's being offended and whose history is being "trivialized" by the use of this allegory or are you just some white guy with a white savior complex?
              White women are also sold as slaves and here in Norway, we never had any non-white slaves. I wonder why you're so focused on skin color when dealing with the issue of whether or not it's ok to sell human beings. Done a little shopping on 4sale perhaps, or just fantasizing, maybe?

              I'm an anarchist. Not a white anarchist, just an anarchist. Doesn't make me a savior and doesn't mean I have a complex. Only means that I have a preference for freedom and the understanding and comprehension of the fact that my freedom is worth next to nothing as long as people around me are not.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by jo-erlend View Post
                Why are you talking about ancestors when people are being sold as property as we speak?
                Because the historical context is what's generally being referred to when slavery is discussed, not modern incarnations like Chinese prison and concentration camp labor or or human trafficking. The historical context is even more relevant here considering the people supposedly being made uncomfortable by the analogy are U.S descendants of slaves (and to some extent other black people).

                We are not talking about history. People are being sold right now. The idea that I am a victim of censorship whenever I choose to not say offensive things, is ridiculous. Aren't there many offensive things that you choose not to say? Does that mean you're in favor of censorship?
                You may personally be fine with self-censorship, but when you start pushing others towards it based on bogus reasons like this of course people who see these bogus reasons for what they are will put their foot down and not yield to your demands for censorship. That's what it is, plan and simple. Censorship.

                I haven't said that I want Vulkan to change their terminology. I have said that I want them to have the freedom to do so and that I personally think that it's a good idea.
                That's a nice little bit of mental gymnastics you've got going on there, but your calling this terminology "racist" on bogus reasons and then going all "I'm not going to tell you to not use it, but I wouldn't use it, *Wink* *Wink* *Nudge* *Nudge*" is very obviously still censorship. It's a bit like claiming that after the kristallnacht the nazis weren't stopping people from visiting jewish businesses as they were still free to visit them despite the broken windows and "JUDE" and a skull painted on with white paint.

                White women are also sold as slaves and here in Norway, we never had any non-white slaves. I wonder why you're so focused on skin color when dealing with the issue of whether or not it's ok to sell human beings. Done a little shopping on 4sale perhaps, or just fantasizing, maybe?
                So that's a clear "Yes, I'm a white guy" then? Because you could have just spelled it out clearly instead of trying to draw up some kind of victim of slavery status for yourself over human trafficking of women from Eastern Europe in Norway.

                If we're going to play this dumb game I'm going to have to point out that I'm from Finland and our experiences with slavery are mostly in the form of being victims of it. Particularly of Russian cossacks who made semi-regular slave hunting excursions and invasions that only ended when we were conquered entirely by the Russians in 1809. The biggest of these was the so-called "Isoviha" in the early 1700s when they conquered most what is now southern Finland and of Finland's roughly 400.000 population about 20.000 - 30.000, most of them women and children, were taken as slaves and about as many were killed outright.

                Of those taken as slaves the main use was as slave labor in the construction of St. Petersburg, but a large part were sold on ending up as far away as modern day Iran, then the Ottoman Empire. In the end only about 2000 of those taken as slaves were ever able to return, the rest of them either died, were unable to ever escape or ended up so far away they never had any hope or returning home. If you scale those numbers to today's population of 5.518 million the 12.5% number of killed or taken as slaves equates to about 690.000 and the 6.25% of the total population taken as slaves equates to about 344.000 people.

                However I'm not going to try to use this as some kind of bogus justification for some made up victim status due to my distant relatives having befallen this fate. History may make some people uncomfortable, but trying to hide them away like this and acting like it didn't happen and that there aren't valuable lessons to be learned from it is entirely counter-productive. All this does is polish a few people's egos that based on the idea they're actually achieving something when they're very obviously not doing anything of real substance.

                Want to actually do something about righting the shadows of the wrongs of the past? Well you're certainly not achieving anything doing something as insubstantial as this.

                I'm an anarchist. Not a white anarchist, just an anarchist. Doesn't make me a savior and doesn't mean I have a complex. Only means that I have a preference for freedom and the understanding and comprehension of the fact that my freedom is worth next to nothing as long as people around me are not.
                Anarchism is all about trying to create a supposedly freer and oppression-free society for everyone, not just themselves. It and other "world-improving" ideologies are very much cases of a saviour complex in action. No matter how hard you try to spin it, any ideology that tries to save others as it's core value, be it anarchism or evangelical christianity*, they are ultimately acting out their saviour complexes. Evangelical christians are at least up front and honest about their goal of saving people from the imagined consequences of their actions.

                *Where the aim is to "save" people from eternal damnation by stopping them from things like gay marriage, having children out of wedlock, sex before marriage and abortion
                "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

                Comment


                • #38
                  wow, it took 36 comments before someone mentioned nazis! i didn't expect it to take so long. it was a perfect opportunity to bring up SJWs and everything!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X