This is pretty obvious if you think about it. Everyone knows that gravity can be simulated by centripetal acceleration. Drink enough wine and the room starts spinning.
What about the harm they are causing me? These constant cries for censorship cause me no small amount of anguish. Why is my discomfort less important than theirs?
I think we mostly agree here, that offense is used as an attack. You seem to think that there's some form of offense that isn't a passive-aggressive attack. I don't think there is. Perhaps some examples would help?
Just because I know someone has a stick up their ass doesn't make me responsible for the stick making them uncomfortable. They put the stick there, and they can remove it. Getting offended is a choice and I have no sympathy for those who make it.
covert attacks on the 'offender', whose views they dislike
What exactly is covert about that? That's the definition of being offended. It means "I don't like your views and want to shut you up". Nothing more, nothing less.
Let's take this a little further. There's nothing inherently offensive about any act. Therefore 'offending' is not something you can do. The people actually taking an action in this situation are those who are taking offense.
Phrasing it in the usual way makes it sound like the onus is on individuals not to do anything offensive. In reality, if you take offense at something it's entirely your own choice.
But what it would do is make it difficult for a person in a business environment to search for and access this package, especially those with strict internet filtering.
That's the business's problem, not the software's author's.
No, I don't see your point. There is nothing you could say that would offend me more than censoring anything anyone says. If you want to write some software and call it 'die potheads' or whatever (I'm trying to imagine something that I'd find offensive, that's the closest I could come), I'd happily use it if it was useful. It really does not matter what you call it. A fun name is better than a boring name, because fun is good.
The question then becomes: what is the best way for a software community to behave: like adults, or like a 13-year-old who just learned a handful of bad words
From my experience the group most likely to object to bad language is very young children. So the question becomes, what is the best way for a software community to behave? Like adults, or like a 7 year old who tattles every time you say 'damn'?
What he did was an act of salvage, and the Government should be thanking him for saving this artifact. I don't know whether eminent domain applies here, but he's definitely entitled to either keep the rock or be compensated with its fair market value.
In the case of pantyshot, the developer has associated his name to that project. If I were an prospective employer doing a search on his name, I'd seriously question his judgement.
Here's a man who cares less about what people think than writing good code and having a bit of fun on the side. I'd seriously consider hiring him.
Re:How about "when software is named by assholes"
on
When Software Offends
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
You don't need to be a native speaker of English to know what they think of women.
If you think that the choice of a name implies an endorsement of the act, you don't have a particularly good grasp of any language. Calling this package 'upskirt' has as much to do with pornography as 'kill(1)' has to do with murder.
I'm offended by the suggestion that these names are inappropriate. If we're all supposed to walk on eggshells and not offend anyone, changing the name would offend me. Therefore it should not be done. If on the other hand, I'm supposed to just deal with it, then the same goes for the complainers here.
I can't figure out from what perspective the whiners complaining about bad words are considered the adults in the situation? Quit tattling and grow up people!
Canceling your internet as a time management method is like realizing that you drove drunk last night and deciding that your problem is the car ownership.
Is that not a valid way of dealing with the problem? If you know you can't control your drinking, this seems like an effective way of mitigating the damage it causes.
Slashdot Mirror
It is in 3D. It's just that the stars are too far away for you to notice.
It does kind of read like a Dvorak column, doesn't it.
This is pretty obvious if you think about it. Everyone knows that gravity can be simulated by centripetal acceleration. Drink enough wine and the room starts spinning.
What about the harm they are causing me? These constant cries for censorship cause me no small amount of anguish. Why is my discomfort less important than theirs?
I think we mostly agree here, that offense is used as an attack. You seem to think that there's some form of offense that isn't a passive-aggressive attack. I don't think there is. Perhaps some examples would help?
Still their choice. They don't have to wave their stick around in people's faces.
Just because I know someone has a stick up their ass doesn't make me responsible for the stick making them uncomfortable. They put the stick there, and they can remove it. Getting offended is a choice and I have no sympathy for those who make it.
covert attacks on the 'offender', whose views they dislike
What exactly is covert about that? That's the definition of being offended. It means "I don't like your views and want to shut you up". Nothing more, nothing less.
Because it's their mind that is being offended. I can't be held responsible for what's in your head. You however can control your reactions to things.
This reasoning stretches to its logical conclusion.
Let's take this a little further. There's nothing inherently offensive about any act. Therefore 'offending' is not something you can do. The people actually taking an action in this situation are those who are taking offense.
Phrasing it in the usual way makes it sound like the onus is on individuals not to do anything offensive. In reality, if you take offense at something it's entirely your own choice.
But what it would do is make it difficult for a person in a business environment to search for and access this package, especially those with strict internet filtering.
That's the business's problem, not the software's author's.
No, I don't see your point. There is nothing you could say that would offend me more than censoring anything anyone says. If you want to write some software and call it 'die potheads' or whatever (I'm trying to imagine something that I'd find offensive, that's the closest I could come), I'd happily use it if it was useful. It really does not matter what you call it. A fun name is better than a boring name, because fun is good.
The question then becomes: what is the best way for a software community to behave: like adults, or like a 13-year-old who just learned a handful of bad words
From my experience the group most likely to object to bad language is very young children. So the question becomes, what is the best way for a software community to behave? Like adults, or like a 7 year old who tattles every time you say 'damn'?
What he did was an act of salvage, and the Government should be thanking him for saving this artifact. I don't know whether eminent domain applies here, but he's definitely entitled to either keep the rock or be compensated with its fair market value.
In the case of pantyshot, the developer has associated his name to that project. If I were an prospective employer doing a search on his name, I'd seriously question his judgement.
Here's a man who cares less about what people think than writing good code and having a bit of fun on the side. I'd seriously consider hiring him.
What the fuck kind of idiot thinks "upskirt" and "pantyshot" are good names for a computer program?
You don't need to be a native speaker of English to know what they think of women.
If you think that the choice of a name implies an endorsement of the act, you don't have a particularly good grasp of any language. Calling this package 'upskirt' has as much to do with pornography as 'kill(1)' has to do with murder.
Who are the anti-social jerks here? The people having a little fun with their naming, or the tight asses who are having a conniption fit over it?
I'm offended by the suggestion that these names are inappropriate. If we're all supposed to walk on eggshells and not offend anyone, changing the name would offend me. Therefore it should not be done. If on the other hand, I'm supposed to just deal with it, then the same goes for the complainers here.
I can't figure out from what perspective the whiners complaining about bad words are considered the adults in the situation? Quit tattling and grow up people!
Right. Because there's no middle ground between the ridiculously restrictive IRB process we have today, and Nazi Germany. None whatsoever.
Milgram's "just following orders" torture experiment
Which happens to be one of the most important results in sociology. Just how much are we impeding the progress of science here?
Produce whatever cable you want, and call it HMDI.
Thankfully we have engineers to develop more efficient ways of harvesting meat. The MBAs just take the credit.
Yeah, it takes all types. Good people and evil people. Wait, on second thought, let's do without the evil people.
No, that sounds exactly like what the US stands for.
Canceling your internet as a time management method is like realizing that you drove drunk last night and deciding that your problem is the car ownership.
Is that not a valid way of dealing with the problem? If you know you can't control your drinking, this seems like an effective way of mitigating the damage it causes.