No announcement yet.

Linux Kernel Preparing New Guidelines For Using Inclusive Terminology

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Why not simply change [insert oppressed group's name here] to a different word; instead of tearing down everything else.

    Then people will never speak ill of [insert oppressed group's name here] again; if one thinks that's how things work.

    Recently statues that have nothing to do with any controversy have been defaced, to protest against the removals and rewrites.

    There's no reason to be hateful, but there's also no reason to harvest it by painting everything with the same brush; the very activity that is being rightfully protested against.


    • #52
      Those people are stupid there is no way around this. In a few years i expect noone would be able to buy black or white clothes because someone will think its racist.

      And BTW. Hope none of those braindeads offended by words in a different context than that of humans ever gets interested in kinky activities like BDSM. He will be in for a surprice.


      • #53
        Originally posted by coder View Post
        It's definitely a problem, but it put the game publisher in a no-win situation and was designed to cause exactly these sorts of debates.
        If a bunch of Nazis can hijack an internet joke and coerce the entire nation to ban a perfectly okay symbol, it's the racists winning, not loosing.

        Originally posted by coder View Post
        Um, nobody is going to think that a trademarked term, being used by the rights owner since before it gained those connotations, is being used by the company to signal any such thing. It would really have to be pervasive, before MS would probably react.
        Just as much as nobody thought that signing an OK on CoD was a nod to white supremacists, right? This was an obvious hyperbole but one can see _Alex_'s point.


        • #54
          Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
          Because we waste time doing nonsense like this?!

          You say "we", implying you are a kernel developer. If you are a kernel developer, why are you complaining here? What open source projects do you contribute do? The kernel was a late-comer to the inclusive code of conduct movement; many other projects had already adopted them. I assume you disdain to contribute to projects that have such a a CoC, so what do you contribute do?

          Back to the kernel: Get a lwn subscription and hang out with actual devs. Post your opinions there, and see what real kernel devs think of them. It's still a public forum, we can all be educated by the response you trigger, if you have enough credibility to deserve a reply.

          Now, you know how you said "Ugh, I can't stop talking". Why don't you try? Just because you can post the same thing again and again doesn't mean you should. Your views (on this topic) are unoriginal, lack analysis, empathy and insight, and your opinion is irrelevant.

          Were you one of the Phoronix mob who predicted that the CoC would be the end of the kernel? 5.8, the biggest kernel release in years with more developers than ever is a long, long time after that prediction was supposed to come true.

          Oh, I am a CoC supporter : "...ugh, I'm not talking to you anymore. I won't talk to CoC (corru-*cough*) supporters.


          • #55
            Originally posted by cynical View Post

            If there is one constant in the universe that you can rely on, it is the obsession that Europeans have with their healthcare.
            It's funny that you say that. There is one country where healthcare has been the subject of bitter dispute over three national elections, which divides the electorate, which pits state against state, where case after case goes to the Supreme Court, and that country is not in Europe. I don't think it is much of an issue in European elections.


            • #56
              I see a minor problem with replacing blacklist with blocklist: it can be confused with blockchain. If possible, I would choose a different term that was not built up from a word with two significant technology related meanings:


              1) Prevent something from progressing.
              2) An item from which other thing are built.

              Perhaps an allowlist and a disallowlist, or allowlist and rejectlist. There are other antonyms for allow which do not have this ambiguity problem.


              • #57
                Originally posted by antonyshen View Post
                I do agree everyone's life matters, however I don't agree on political argument happen in tech space.
                In tech most likely no one uses the terms in question with racist intentions, but inclusive terminology is not solely about intentions. It is also about the awareness that stereotypes and cliches live on unconsciously - in language, in traditions...

                Ie a tradition:

                People celebrating the 'Zwarte Piet' are most likely no racists, yet there is something odd about it if you learn where this tradition and its symbolic aspects come from.

                So ie 'blacklist' - it is interesting to ask why 'black' was used to signify an exclusion...

                And of course there is also the possibility that digging for hidden meaning in language gets absurd, because its symbolic aspects are extremely complex. On the other hand, you still have to dig, like you have to dig in history to uncover where certain traditions come from.


                • #58
                  I suggest banning all words that a cultural origination.
                  And by that, I mean all language. There, nobody will be offended anymore.


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by coder View Post
                    Um, nobody is going to think that a trademarked term, being used by the rights owner since before it gained those connotations, is being used by the company to signal any such thing. It would really have to be pervasive, before MS would probably react.
                    The OK symbol is similar. Its use as "OK" predates a very small minority like 0.00001% who might have made it as a trolling attempt to be something else. Still, 99.999% of the people are using it to say OK. So why should the 99.999% be penalized for some idiots?

                    So if we make thumbs up a symbol for white supremacy, then we'll mess up all the social media with the like button calling them racists


                    • #60
                      never in my life have i ever sat here and saw the word blacklist and thought of black people. never in my life have i ever met a single soul who did. you think you're helping people, when in reality all you're doing is creating more racist and attacking things that don't solve the root of the problem. going on a puritan crusade in the name of inclusive isn't going to help a poor black family rise out of poverty and create stable a foundation for future generations. its not going to help inner cities school inspire young minorities that they too can be scientist. its not going to cause a real racist have their coming to jesus moment in realizing their behavior is disgusting. instead all you're doing is going on an authoritarian, puritan crusade purging words you don't like because all you see is racism in everything. these people are closet racists who are obsessed with race. they can't look past skin color like they can't even look past their own shadow. let alone think outside of a box.

                      it breaks my heart to see the left turn into the crazies of the fundamentalist christians of the 90's. you know when you're not oppressed and have nothing else better to do when you start purging words that you, yourself take out of context.

                      sigh, as the modern day puritans go on their purity crusade i'm going to sit here and watch the movie karate kid that uses the word master in reference to ones sensei and enjoy it without having a mental breakdown because unlike some people today, i'm able to understand context. honestly, there was no point in the christian right losing the culture war if the left in the end was going to lose their sanity. becoming the very moral crusaders the christian right was ridiculed for. to become the same censorship, my way or the highway christian right of the 90's. uneducated, taking things out of context, banning, censoring, and complete moral domination. maybe in reality for many it was never actually against what the right was doing, but instead they were simply envious and wanted to be the ones in control. the right was doing it for the wrong reasons. their reasons wasn't pure.