6 ms·

I'm wondering if this is what it will take to finally push politics out of software development.

by planetzero 7y ago

hkyeti 7y ago
Decent behaviour respectful and inclusive to all?
- Angeo34 7y ago
  You have to remember most people wanting more minority are more likely than not themselves part of the majority. It's just an outlet for people to make themselves feel better. It is not even slightly altruistic its just terribly hid narcism and egoism. I've never heard any of those social and political correctness bullshit outside of US even worse most Europeans I talk to, minority or not, find it beyond ridiculous. Meritocracy is the only way.
- d8k3nv723h4sdf9 7y ago
  But who should be responsible of deciding if Stallman was indecent or not inclusive and why?
  - throwaway57023 7y ago
    Who should be responsible of deciding if anyone is indecent or inclusive? Are decency and inclusivity even real?
- planetzero 7y ago
  what's the definition of 'decent' behavior and who gets to decide? What if cheating on your spouse is considered indecent to me. should anyone that gets caught cheating get kicked out of their open source project? On top of this, Stallman hasn't been convicted in any courts. It's only a court of public opinion where a mere allegation means you are already guilty. 1984 in 2019.
  - joshuamorton 7y ago
    > On top of this, Stallman hasn't been convicted in any courts. And no one has as far as I've seen, suggested imprisoning him. Just removing him from a position of authority.
joshuamorton 7y ago
The GNU and stallman are political. "Removing politics" from software would require a definitive answer to GPL or MIT being a better license.
- kd3 7y ago
  MIT is the better license because it is more free than GPL. GPL comes with specific obligations.
  - karmakaze 7y ago
    The specific obligations in GPL are there to ensure the continued availability of modified sources--that is keep the software free.
    - kd3 7y ago
      I understand why they are there but that has nothing to do with freedom. Forcing people to obey rules if they want to use the software is not freedom. In contrast, MIT gives and requires nothing. That is true freedom.
      - karmakaze 7y ago
        See Copyleft [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft
      - LocalH 7y ago
        GPL puts more importance on the software's freedom. MIT puts more importance on the developer's freedom. Arguably, it's not really possible to claim one is better than the other because they have different philosophies. If you feel that ensuring the code must stay free is important, GPL is probably the better license. If you're more interested in the freedom of the developer to use the code even in a non-free way, then MIT would be the better license.

I'm wondering if this is what it will take to finally push politics out of software development.

hkyeti 7y ago

Decent behaviour respectful and inclusive to all?

Angeo34 7y ago
You have to remember most people wanting more minority are more likely than not themselves part of the majority. It's just an outlet for people to make themselves feel better. It is not even slightly altruistic its just terribly hid narcism and egoism. I've never heard any of those social and political correctness bullshit outside of US even worse most Europeans I talk to, minority or not, find it beyond ridiculous. Meritocracy is the only way.
d8k3nv723h4sdf9 7y ago
But who should be responsible of deciding if Stallman was indecent or not inclusive and why?
- throwaway57023 7y ago
  Who should be responsible of deciding if anyone is indecent or inclusive? Are decency and inclusivity even real?
planetzero 7y ago
what's the definition of 'decent' behavior and who gets to decide? What if cheating on your spouse is considered indecent to me. should anyone that gets caught cheating get kicked out of their open source project? On top of this, Stallman hasn't been convicted in any courts. It's only a court of public opinion where a mere allegation means you are already guilty. 1984 in 2019.
- joshuamorton 7y ago
  > On top of this, Stallman hasn't been convicted in any courts. And no one has as far as I've seen, suggested imprisoning him. Just removing him from a position of authority.

joshuamorton 7y ago

The GNU and stallman are political. "Removing politics" from software would require a definitive answer to GPL or MIT being a better license.

kd3 7y ago
MIT is the better license because it is more free than GPL. GPL comes with specific obligations.
- karmakaze 7y ago
  The specific obligations in GPL are there to ensure the continued availability of modified sources--that is keep the software free.
  - kd3 7y ago
    I understand why they are there but that has nothing to do with freedom. Forcing people to obey rules if they want to use the software is not freedom. In contrast, MIT gives and requires nothing. That is true freedom.
    - karmakaze 7y ago
      See Copyleft [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft
    - LocalH 7y ago
      GPL puts more importance on the software's freedom. MIT puts more importance on the developer's freedom. Arguably, it's not really possible to claim one is better than the other because they have different philosophies. If you feel that ensuring the code must stay free is important, GPL is probably the better license. If you're more interested in the freedom of the developer to use the code even in a non-free way, then MIT would be the better license.