/g/ - Technology
install openbsd
[Make a Post]>>1502
Even pigchan threads tend to include actual information in the OP at least 1/4th the time. Step up your game OP and stop embarrassing us. Archive your shit, put plenty of quotes, etc.
File: 55079d1e3451ac345f6e99f7a84fba02188d2812fb46aa0faca216631c140276.png (dl) (22.25 KiB)

>pigchan
Is that how 4chan is called now?
>>1501
You could have at least included some information from that link you posted ... or its author, namely Eric S. Raymond*
* Wtf is up with his favicon (see pic, or link)?
http://www.catb.org/favicon.ico
>>1505
That's his icon. He uses it for his avatar on his blog and on twitter. I don't know why he uses it.
ESR is considered to be a complete description of him. This would be like complaining that OP didn't say who RMS is.
The hacker culture, and STEM in general, are under ideological attack. Recently I blogged a safety warning that according to a source I consider reliable, a “women in tech” pressure group has made multiple efforts to set Linus Torvalds up for a sexual assault accusation. I interpreted this as an attempt to beat the hacker culture into political pliability, and advised anyone in a leadership position to beware of similar attempts.
Now comes Roberto Rosario of the Django Software Foundation. Django is a web development framework that is a flourishing and well-respected part of the ecology around the of the Python language. On October 29th 2015 he reported that someone posting as ‘djangoconcardiff’ opened an issue against pull request #176 on ‘awesome-django’, addressing it to Rosario. This was the first paragraph.
>Hi
>great project!! I have one observation and a suggestion. I noticed that you have rejected some pull requests to add some good django libraries and that the people submitting thsoe pull requests are POCs (People of Colour). As a suggestion I recommend adopting the Contributor Code of Conduct (http://contributor-covenant.org) to ensure everyone’s contributions are accepted regarless [sic] of their sex, sexual orientation, skin color, religion, height, place of origin, etc. etc. etc. As a white straight male and lead of this trending repository, your adoption of this Code of Conduct will send a loud and clear message that inclusion is a primary objective of the Django community and of the software development community in general. D.
Conversation on that issue is preserved in the Twitter link above, but the issue itself in GitHub has apparently been deleted in its totality. Normally, only GitHub staff can do this. A copy is preserved here.
It is unknown who was speaking as ‘djangoconcardiff’, and that login has now been deleted, like the GitHub issue. (DjangoCon Europe 2015 was this past May/June in Cardiff.)
The slippery, Newspeak-like quality of djangoconcardiff’s “suggestion” makes it hard to pin down from the text itself whether he/she is merely stumping for inclusiveness or insinuating that rejection of pull requests by “persons of color” is itself evidence of racism and thoughtcrime.
But, if you think you’re reading that ‘djangoconcardiff’ considers acceptance of pull requests putatively from “persons of color” to be politically mandatory, a look at the Contributor Covenant he/she advocates will do nothing to dissuade you. Paragraph 2 denounces the “pervasive cult of meritocracy”. [Update: The explicit language has since been removed. The intention rather obviously remains]
It is clear that djangoconcardiff and the author of the Covenant (self-described transgender feminist Coraline Ada Ehmke) want to replace the “cult of meritocracy” with something else. And equally clear that what they want to replace it with is racial and sexual identity politics.
Rosario tagged his Twitter report “Social Justice in action!” He knows who these people are: SJWs, “Social Justice Warriors”. And, unless you have been living under a rock, so do you. These are the people – the political and doctrinal tendency, united if in no other way by an elaborate shared jargon and a seething hatred of djangoconcardiff’s “white straight male”, who recently hounded Nobel laureate Tim Hunt out of his job with a fraudulent accusation of sexist remarks.
I’m not going to analyze SJW ideology here except to point out, again, why the hacker culture must consider anyone who holds it an enemy. This is because we must be a cult of meritocracy. We must constantly demand merit – performance, intelligence, dedication, and technical excellence – of ourselves and each other.
Now that the Internet – the hacker culture’s creation! – is everywhere, and civilization is increasingly software-dependent, we have a duty, the duty I wrote about in Holding Up The Sky. The invisible gears have to turn. The shared software infrastructure of civilization has to work, or economies will seize up and people will die. And for large sections of that infrastructure, it’s on us – us! – to keep it working. Because nobody else is going to step up.
We dare not give less than our best. If we fall away from meritocracy – if we allow the SJWs to remake us as they wish, into a hell-pit of competitive grievance-mongering and political favoritism for the designated victim group of the week – we will betray not only what is best in our own traditions but the entire civilization that we serve.
This isn’t about women in tech, or minorities in tech, or gays in tech. The hacker culture’s norm about inclusion is clear: anybody who can pull the freight is welcome, and twitching about things like skin color or shape of genitalia or what thing you like to stick into what thing is beyond wrong into silly. This is about whether we will allow “diversity” issues to be used as wedges to fracture our community, degrade the quality of our work, and draw us away from our duty.
When hackers fail our own standards of meritocracy, as we sometimes do, it’s up to us to fix it from within our own tradition: judge by the work alone, you are what you do, shut up and show us the code. A movement whose favored tools include the rage mob, the dox, and faked incidents of bigotry is not morally competent to judge us or instruct us.
I have been participating in and running open-source projects for a quarter-century. In all that time I never had to know or care whether my fellow contributors were white, black, male, female, straight, gay, or from the planet Mars, only whether their code was good. The SJWs want to make me care; they want to make all of us obsess about this, to the point of having quotas and struggle sessions and what amounts to political officers threatening us if we are insufficiently “diverse”.
Think I’m exaggerating? Read the whole djangoconcardiff thread. What’s there is totalitarianism in miniature: ideology is everything, merit counts for nothing against the suppression of thoughtcrime, and politics is conducted by naked intimidation against any who refuse to conform. Near the end of the conversation djangoconcardiff threatens to denounce Rosario to the board of the Django Software Foundation in the confused, illiterate, vicious idiom of an orc or a stormtrooper.
It has been suggested that djangoconcardiff might be a troll emulating an SJW, and we should thus take him less seriously. The problem with this idea is that no SJW disclaimed him – more generally, that “Social Justice” has reached a sort of Poe’s Law singularity at which the behavior of trolls and true believers becomes indistinguishable even to each other, and has the same emergent effects.
In the future, the hacker whose community standing the SJWs threaten could be you. The SJWs talk ‘diversity’ but like all totalitarians they measure success only by total ideological surrender – repeating their duckspeak, denouncing others for insufficent political correctness, loving Big Brother. Not being a straight white male won’t save you either – Roberto Rosario is an Afro-Hispanic Puerto Rican.
We must cast these would-be totalitarians out – refuse to admit them on any level except by evaluating on pure technical merit whatever code patches they submit. We must refuse to let them judge us, and learn to recognize their thought-stopping jargon and kafkatraps as a clue that there is no point in arguing with them and the only sane course is to disengage. We can’t fix what’s broken about the SJWs; we can, and must, refuse to let them break us.
(Roberto Rosario, Meredith L. Patterson, and Rick Moen assisted in the composition of this post. However, any errors are the sole responsibility of the author.)
File: 7b7715fe19821eb36959f0f7c48f219eae02dbc7a6e8dea9907d31c2d63ec3ca.jpg (dl) (105.27 KiB)

We need to create """problematic""" software so corporations stay out of hacker culture. Like name your open source file browser "nigger". All this SJW bullshit is just because of corporations getting into open source and infosec.
>>1530
Then faggots make a fork of your software with a different name.
Like fortune with removed Hitler quotes.
File: 936d6e1eada8e8de69d7e78225933674316341013fd97f28f5489ec81f3409d9.pdf (dl) (2.43 MiB)
>removed Hitler quotes
Probably because it portrayed him and National Socialism in a positive light, here's Adolf Hitler on Palestine:
>Similarly the fact has obviously escaped Mr. Roosevelt's notice that Palestine is at present occupied not by German troops but by the English; and that the country is undergoing restriction of its liberty by the most brutal resort to force, is being robbed of its independence and is suffering the cruelest maltreatment for the benefit of Jewish interlopers.
>The Arabs living in that country would therefore certainly not have complained to Mr. Roosevelt of German aggression, but they are voicing a constant appeal to the world, deploring the barbarous methods with which England is attempting to suppress a people which loves its freedom and is merely defending it.
>This, too, is perhaps a problem which in the American President's view should be solved at the conference table, that is, before a just judge, and not by physical force or military methods, by mass executions, burning down villages, blowing up houses and so on.
>For one fact is surely certain. In this case England is not defending herself against a threatened Arab attack, but as an uninvited interloper [think again of Occupied Palestine, aka Israel, today], is endeavoring to establish her power in a foreign territory which does not belong to her.
>I am not least willing to allow foreign statesmen to create a second Palestine right here in the heart of Germany. The poor Arabs are defenseless and have been abandoned by all. The Germans in Czechoslovakia are neither defenseless nor have they been abandoned. Please note this fact!
https://vimeo.com/161386027
Mein Kampf (My Struggle) is worth reading as well, see attached file.
>>1540
That's why you should make all your software heavily restricted and licensed so that subhumans can't legally use it. And back that up with legal action.
>>1547
Just wondering, if I chose say GPLv3 for my software project and have had people contributing to my software, am I still legally able to switch licenses after that?
>>1548
You can switch licenses for future releases, but not for past releases. If you try to retroactively apply a license to a past release, it will have no legal power.
>>1552
Well if the contributors agreed to contribute under the GPLv3 and a year later I switch to the MIT license won't that be a problem? By the way I think it's best for people to not care about copyright at all, but yeah.
>>1554
well that's basically how every darkweb software project functions. the authors can't take legal action without compromising their anonymity, so all their software is technically proprietary but in practice you can do anything with it.
If one were a clearnet proprietary software developer, you could just state in your license "nobody can use this software", but only ever take action against nonwhites. It would require a great deal of trust from white people to use your software though, since they could technically get sued at any time.
>>1548
Major projects distinguish between "trivial" changes, which aren't under copyright because they're so simple, and non-trivial changes. If you have contributors submitting non-trivial changes, then you have to either get them to agree to a license switch, or remove their changes from the tree beforehand.
One handy workaround for the GPL though is to use a patchset. Have the source code you have rights to under whichever license, and then distribute their changes as a GPL licensed patchset alongside the rest of the source. If you want to distribute bins, you'll need to use the old linking loophole instead.
>>1555
If you only redistribute your changes over the darkweb, then you get the extra protection that a potential litigator can't prove you did it.
>you could just state in your license "nobody can use this software"
This is a EULA, not a license. Generally, the enforcability of EULAs is much weaker than a real contract. A court wouldn't listen to you if you said you were banning people who got the software legitimately from running it. The only thing licenses can limit is distribution. So you could say "nobody can distribute the software", but then only sue people who give it to non-whites. (I also bet that some non-white would sue you for discrimination anyways, and win because courts are pozzed)
>>1540
And only bloatwhores will run software so bloated it has changesets and even extra code just to remove "problematic" language.
[Catalog][Overboard][Update]
[Reply]21 replies
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918