5 ms·

It's very hard to believe you. Comparing life under a dictatorship with somebody asking to change an icon without having any power to impose their will.

pjmlp 4y ago
Here is the thing I don't care one second, beyond this comment.
bheadmaster 4y ago
Do they not? The icon has changed, so they obviously have the power. Maybe not by force, but being afraid of being cancelled can be just as powerful.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  "cancelled" by xiphias2 deleting the repository on github using magic? HN can't even tell the difference with asking and imposing?
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    There doesn't have to be a direct tangible threat for people to act on impulses they were taught through a direct tangible threat (see: learned helplessness [0]). That's the way reinforcement learning works on humans, otherwise there would be no concept of ethics - ethics itself is based on generalizing a basic set of rules learned through punishment and reward. The power is there, because it had an effect on reality, whether you admit it or not. The person has indeed asked, but consider what would happen if the person asked for the whole repository to be deleted, for example, because they personally didn't like the RISC-V architecture: the request would probably not be fulfilled. But the request for removing the cigarette emoji was followed - why? What's the difference between the two? My theory is that the ratio between the learned "threat" and required effort to avoid the "threat" was low enough to warrant the action. Assuming the effort is a constant (editing a single text file and pushing it to GitHub == removing the repository; ~same amount of clicks), that means that the learned "threat" was high enough to warrant the deletion. The threat comes from the cancel culture that glorifies anyone that presents themselves (or others) as victims. In case of the second - hypothetical - request, there is no such threat, so the request itself would be rendered bizarre and selfish. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness
    - microtherion 4y ago
      Alternatively, maybe the project authors decided that the cigarette imagery was (1) bothering somebody, and (2) did not matter to the identity of the project and was easily removed, so they decided to honor the request. It's probably what I would have done. Conversely, I was the author of a project whose namesake and mascot was an animal considered unclean by several world religions. Nobody ever asked me to change it, but I probably would have refused, because in this case, it was tied too much into the identity of the project.
      - LekKit 4y ago
        This is exactly what happened. I never though much about the imagery, it was a 5-min commit to "make README look nicer", and I actually have asthma as well (Never been much around smokers so maybe I don't have such terrible associations). So it's much more of a, heh let's honor this random person request since I don't care much in the first place, and even if it's a little weird to trigger at the icon, I can kind of see why.
    - kelnos 4y ago
      > My theory is that the ratio between the learned "threat" and required effort to avoid the "threat" was low enough to warrant the action. We can also take the more charitable interpretation: the repo owner saw the post asking for it to be removed, thought "yeah, wow, you're right, cigarettes do suck, and having it there is unnecessary and doesn't actually add anything valuable, so I might as well change it to something else". Or, hell, we could even go out on a limb: "oh wow, I didn't realize someone might be offended by that, but I'll change it because I have no feelings about it being there whatsoever, and I don't want my project to make someone feel bad". Cuz, y'know, empathy is a thing. (The cigarette emoji was in front of the "Tell me more..." heading; I'm having a hard time coming up with a reason for it to be there in the first place.) I do agree with you that cancel culture has gotten out of hand, and some people will make the calculus you describe in some situations, but that seems a bit too much here. I doubt anyone is going to get cancelled over a cigarette emoji in a README, and it seems overblown to assume the repo owner made the change out of fear. (Famous last words, I know, but I stand by that.)

pjmlp 4y ago

Here is the thing I don't care one second, beyond this comment.

bheadmaster 4y ago

Do they not? The icon has changed, so they obviously have the power. Maybe not by force, but being afraid of being cancelled can be just as powerful.

goodpoint 4y ago
"cancelled" by xiphias2 deleting the repository on github using magic? HN can't even tell the difference with asking and imposing?
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  There doesn't have to be a direct tangible threat for people to act on impulses they were taught through a direct tangible threat (see: learned helplessness [0]). That's the way reinforcement learning works on humans, otherwise there would be no concept of ethics - ethics itself is based on generalizing a basic set of rules learned through punishment and reward. The power is there, because it had an effect on reality, whether you admit it or not. The person has indeed asked, but consider what would happen if the person asked for the whole repository to be deleted, for example, because they personally didn't like the RISC-V architecture: the request would probably not be fulfilled. But the request for removing the cigarette emoji was followed - why? What's the difference between the two? My theory is that the ratio between the learned "threat" and required effort to avoid the "threat" was low enough to warrant the action. Assuming the effort is a constant (editing a single text file and pushing it to GitHub == removing the repository; ~same amount of clicks), that means that the learned "threat" was high enough to warrant the deletion. The threat comes from the cancel culture that glorifies anyone that presents themselves (or others) as victims. In case of the second - hypothetical - request, there is no such threat, so the request itself would be rendered bizarre and selfish. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness
  - microtherion 4y ago
    Alternatively, maybe the project authors decided that the cigarette imagery was (1) bothering somebody, and (2) did not matter to the identity of the project and was easily removed, so they decided to honor the request. It's probably what I would have done. Conversely, I was the author of a project whose namesake and mascot was an animal considered unclean by several world religions. Nobody ever asked me to change it, but I probably would have refused, because in this case, it was tied too much into the identity of the project.
    - LekKit 4y ago
      This is exactly what happened. I never though much about the imagery, it was a 5-min commit to "make README look nicer", and I actually have asthma as well (Never been much around smokers so maybe I don't have such terrible associations). So it's much more of a, heh let's honor this random person request since I don't care much in the first place, and even if it's a little weird to trigger at the icon, I can kind of see why.
  - kelnos 4y ago
    > My theory is that the ratio between the learned "threat" and required effort to avoid the "threat" was low enough to warrant the action. We can also take the more charitable interpretation: the repo owner saw the post asking for it to be removed, thought "yeah, wow, you're right, cigarettes do suck, and having it there is unnecessary and doesn't actually add anything valuable, so I might as well change it to something else". Or, hell, we could even go out on a limb: "oh wow, I didn't realize someone might be offended by that, but I'll change it because I have no feelings about it being there whatsoever, and I don't want my project to make someone feel bad". Cuz, y'know, empathy is a thing. (The cigarette emoji was in front of the "Tell me more..." heading; I'm having a hard time coming up with a reason for it to be there in the first place.) I do agree with you that cancel culture has gotten out of hand, and some people will make the calculus you describe in some situations, but that seems a bit too much here. I doubt anyone is going to get cancelled over a cigarette emoji in a README, and it seems overblown to assume the repo owner made the change out of fear. (Famous last words, I know, but I stand by that.)