GitHub Takes Down Satirical 'C Plus Equality' Language
FooAtWFU writes "Some clowns and jokers over at 4chan thought it would be a funny idea to put together a web page for a programming language named 'C Plus Equality' as a parody of feminism, dismissing OOP as 'objectifying' and inheritance as "a tool of the patriarchy". But this parody was apparently too hot to host at Github, which took down the original Github repository after receiving criticism on Twitter, prompting a backlash and inquiry into the role of free speech and censorship on Github's platform. The project has since found a new home on BitBucket, at least for the time being." Comments on an article describing the research which sparked the parody call the parody's language "fake," and compare it to the 1996 Sokal affair. (It also reminds me a bit of Jesux.)
Is that Github also killed off all the forked versions of the repo as well, not just the main one.
I'm a little bit annoyed that they both have this power and used it in this wya.
It seems it was also too hot for Hacker News to discuss.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Its not the government. Its a private entity and thus not bound by the first amendment.
But it does bring up an important point- GitHub is a private entity, a for-profit company. Right now, they provide a useful service if you like git. In the future they may not. Many companies have helped the FOSS community then turned their backs on it. Use them, but don't ever fully trust them.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
She wasn't aware of C Plus Equality until now
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Well. Github's Terms of Service clearly identifies that "We may, but have no obligation to, remove Content and Accounts containing Content that we determine in our sole discretion are unlawful, offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, pornographic, obscene or otherwise objectionable". I assume they used that discretion to find it either "offensive" or "otherwise objectionable". And clearly Github is well within their legal rights to take down this content.
But it does illustrate the limits of Github's commitment to freedom and openness: if it offends Github's staff, or if Github thinks it offends people who could get them in some level of trouble, they'll take down your content. So, you can still use Github as a platform to effect change in the world, but only insofar as Github&co agree with you.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Specifically it looks like it might be a satire of the entirely serious Feminist programming Language discussion (http://m.hastac.org/blogs/ari-schlesinger/2013/11/26/feminism-and-programming-languages).
"The idea came about while discussing normative and feminist subject object theory. I realized that object oriented programmed reifies normative subject object theory. This led me to wonder what a feminist programming language would look like, one that might allow you to create entanglements (Karen Barad Posthumanist Performativity)."
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
The difference is that mindfuck isn't targeting one group of people with a demeaning "parody".
Given this community's gender troubles (e.g. http://www.livescience.com/9772-geeks-drive-girls-computer-science.html), does mocking feminists do anything other than confirm the boy's club. Yes, misapplying feminist critiques of male dominated society to programming languages is amusing, but really lads, time to clean up the house.
Considering their platform is mainly closed-source, I'm not sure this is the first place we've spotted that they are not fully committed to freedom and openness. They're a business that sells project hosting space, using the free accounts as a marketing & onboarding tool, not some kind of free-culture advocacy group.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Not in California, where GitHub is headquartered. California's constitution says "everyone has the right to free speech" and the Supreme Court of the US has interpreted this to mean that it goes beyond "Congress shall pass no law..." and applies, in some situations, to private entities. The more someone opens their property up to the use of the general public, the more their private property rights are circumscribed by the publics. See Pruneyard vs. Robins. I'm not saying that people certainly have a right to use Github like they way they have a right to pass out fliers at a shopping center or outside a big box store, but to deny that freedom of speech applies to private businesses/property in California is wrong.
THAT'S NOT FUNNY!
This would not be the first time. Earlier this year, the Extremely Vocal Minority had Locus Online take down my April Fools piece.
Original feminists had real complaints. Third Wave/Race Critical Theory/Victimhood Identity Politics feminists seem to believe that they have a right not to be offended.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I have much experience in dealing with the topic at hand, and feel obliged to warn you of the inherent danger of your snack selection preference in this instance.
The social justice warrior will insist you be eating all the popcorn whether it pops or not. After all: Should not all the kernels be treated equally? You're not a popist cornsagonist furthering strict kernel roles, are you?
Others observant of finer detail than applying the label popist or not based on eating preference will note that all the kernels were treated equally: They were given a chance to pop, but some did not choose to be popped and digested by the system. Indeed there could be physiological predeterminations for the unpopped vs popped variety of kernel, and it would be equally wrong to pressure the eater to consume those that are incompatible with digestion as it's wrong to shame the unpopped kernels for not entering the food cycle; Certainly it would be moronic to claim the plight of the popped ones is a privilege.
The social justice warrior will then declare that the popped or not state can't be determined at kernel creation, it's the environment that has a bias for exactly what types of corn are suitable for popping and creates repressive constraints on which kernels are allowed to pop. They'll demand a more fair popping system be devised, but not actually outline any exact plans for such a system so you'll know when it has been achieved, and they'll ignore how the popping system may affect the popped corn itself.
Others with a knowledge of botany and thermodynamics will point out that kernels of certain genetic predispositions have known traits, and that there are many systems for popping, which all yield different types of popped corn and unpopped kernels. Air popping gives kernels more time to pop, but creates a drier popcorn that's not suitable for everyone's tastes. Kettle popping creates a more traditional flavour, and yields more unpopped kernels. The most unpopped kernels are produced via microwave environment due to the heat being applied to already popped kernels which limits the duration of popping time and kernel batch size, it's also more likely to produce artificial flavors; However, nuked kernels have utility in being compact and accessible to more eaters. It's too simplistic to blame the eater for the kernels or popping environment available, or the environment for the consumer's preference, or either of these for the physical properties of individual kernels or how the laws of thermodynamics and genetics work. Neither the eater nor the popper are being cornsagonist against kernels; To them all the kernels are given equal opportunity to pop and enter the digestive system.
At which point the social justice warrior will leverage a collection of statistics on the types of popping and evidence of past abuse of corn, burning, neglect, being feed to lesser animals, etc. They'll point to select occurrences of popping gone horribly wrong. If one's not careful to interject quickly it will turn into a gish gallop.
While admittedly the tragic popping can't be ignored, one must examine the frequency of such occurrence and the attention that society does give -- A slew of firemen may arrive to deal with a single bag of over nuked corn; It's clearly not cornsagony. The scientific minded observer will point out that past abuses do not reflect current corn popping culture and that anecdotal evidence is not really evidence; They'll note that the statistics only show a trend, not a causal link to cornsagony, and that sections of the studies have gone ignored: The uneaten popped kernels. If the study was performed by the social justice alliance you'll likely find a bias in the selection criteria (went looking for evidence for a preconceived kernel popping opinion) and there'll be no testing of the null hypothesis, or unequivocal evidence that the conclusion is correct, or that popping trends could not instead be formed by
The problem is that misogyny is seen as offensive where misandry is treated as non-offensive and acceptable behavior for women to have :-/ Whereas it should either be both unacceptable or both acceptable.
Considering GitHub is based off using git, every previous contributor already carries a complete download of the whole thing, including a history of all past commits and branches, at all times. At most, they would lose the handful of commits made since their last fetch.
You don't have any rights. No one has rights. Rights are guarantees. In this Universe, there are no guarantees. Tomorrow, you might be killed by a wild animal. Or perhaps, a meteor might come tumbling down and wipe out all life on Earth, including you. What good were your rights?
As society collapses due to feminism, and we return to a state of barbarism, you will come to realize that your rights never meant anything at all.
Feminism is unsustainable. It collapsed the Roman empire, and now it collapses Western civilization.
- 5th century BC: Roman civilization is a a strong patriarchy, fathers are liable for the actions of their wife and children, and have absolute authority over the family (including the power of life and death)
- 1st century BC: Roman civilization blossoms into the most powerful and advanced civilization in the world. Material wealth is astounding, citizens (i.e.: non slaves) do not need to work. They have running water, baths and import spices from thousands of miles away. The Romans enjoy the arts and philosophy; they know and appreciate democracy, commerce, science, human rights, animal rights, children rights and women become emancipated. No-fault divorce is enacted, and quickly becomes popular by the end of the century.
- 1st-2nd century AD: The family unit is destroyed. Men refuse to marry and the government tries to revive marriage with a "bachelor tax", to no avail. Children are growing up without fathers, Roman women show little interest in raising their own children and frequently use nannies. The wealth and power of women grows very fast, while men become increasingly demotivated and engage in prostitution and vice. Prostitution and homosexuality become widespread.
- 3rd-4th century AD: A moral and demographic collapse takes place, Roman population declines due to below-replacement birth-rate. Vice and massive corruption are rampant, while the new-born Catholic Religion is gaining power (it becomes the religion of the Empire in 380 AD). There is extreme economic, political and military instability: there are 25 successive emperors in half a century (many end up assassinated), the Empire is ungovernable and on the brink of civil war.
- 5th century AD: The Empire is ruled by an elite of military men that use the Emperor as a puppet; due to massive debts and financial problems, the Empire cannot afford to hire foreign mercenaries to defend itself (Roman citizens have long ago being replaced by mercenaries in the army), and starts "selling" parts of the Empire in exchange for protection. Eventually, the mercenaries figure out that the "Emperor has no clothes", and overrun and pillage the Empire.
- humanity falls back into the Bronze Age (think: eating squirrel meat and living in a cave); 12 centuries of religious zilotry (The Great Inquisition, Crusades) and intellectual darkness follow: science, commerce, philosophy, human rights become unknown concepts until they are rediscovered again during the Age of Enlightenment in 17th century AD.
She's at the store picking up my beer and cigarettes. I expect her back in about 30 minutes.
It is a long walk though, so it may be 45 minutes. What, with the snow and all.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Lets say it together one more time, because feminists like you still don't seem to get it.
"An ideology is not a race"
Criticizing feminism is in no way comparable to having a go at someone for their ethic origin. Your ideology gets no such protection, and trying to claim that it does simply advertises the world that you cannot defend it on a level playing field. This is the exact same tactic used by people who try to deflect valid criticism on Islam on the grounds of racism. Ideas that have to shield themselves from criticism so are almost universally bad ideas.