GitHub bans repository over use of the word "retard"



  • GitHub seems to have disabled a repository for a piece of software called "WebM for Retards". (The user page still shows the repository description)

    Discuss.



  • @immibis_ said:

    Discuss

    No



  • Retard.



  • So the mentally disabled aren't allowed to use WebM now? :confused:


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Luhmann said:

    > Discuss

    No

    Discourse, then? :imp:



  • There's not really anything to discuss without knowing what was actually in the repo. It's probably a similar story to

    where they were using GitHub to host something they were harassing others with instead of actually writing code.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @immibis_ said:

    (The user page still shows the repository description)

    404 here...


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @ben_lubar said:

    ... [Maybe] they were using GitHub to host something they were harassing others with instead of actually writing code.

    Its first appearance in archive.org's cache looks pretty innocuous: https://web.archive.org/web/20140903025840/https://github.com/WebMBro/WebMConverter



  • It has 23 forks in that snapshot, so presumably someone saw one of the forks and didn't get the joke and reported it.



  • I agree with Ben, if it were a genuine project with genuine code in it, I wager GitHub would have sent strongly-worded notices before removing it outright.

    It was probably a "joke" in incredibly bad taste, and GitHub did the world a favor.



  • --@blakeyrat, the man who prefers GUIs over CLIs, 2015.



  • Uh.

    Thanks Ben.

    I guess just follow me around and sign all my posts from now on, then?

    But don't expect to get paid for it.

    Ben-provided signature to follow /



  • It looks like it's a video converter GUI made for 4chan users.



  • That's retarded.



  • I blame the jews.



  • Hence the Retard in the project name...



  • Well, maybe if they used "for Dummies" they would take a copyright infringement or a DMCA take down notice.



  • GitHub has gone full SJW retard.

    Their "tragedy" is that they aren't really a discussion platform. There's not a lot of content on github that can be even made offensive (besides the obvious troll projects). So now they are chomping at bits to do their part in the great social justice war, and there's nothing really for them to do, besides stupid gestures like replacing carpets and publishing these bombastic manifestos.

    IMO people will tolerate their bullshit up to a point. But in the end, anyone can take something like gitlab and start their own public repo business. Places with strong network effect, like twitter and reddit, can force people to put up with their bullshit policies. With github, I think people will just start leaving if they push this social agenda too far.



  • Although this list cannot be exhaustive, we explicitly honor diversity in age, gender, [...] and technical ability*.

    Ring the bells, there's not enough shitty code on GitHub! We need more OMGWTF contestants to combat the tyrany of good programmers!



  • How the fuck else are people gonna gain technical ability except by writing code?

    Here's a comment on the article:

    Also, just because you’ve developed (or born with) a thick hide when it comes to attacks on your religion doesn’t mean everyone should have to develop that thick skin. That’s an awful high barrier to participation for a lot of people.

    Requiring people be “tough enough” to participate reminds me of the dark ages of OSS development, back in the 90s when, IMO, many of “popular” free and open source software communities were hostile to all but “typical” hackers. It wasn’t a better time. It was awful. We had fewer and less diverse participants in OSS development and were less effective at it as a result. T

    oday, we have a broader, larger, and more capable community than ever and it’s precisely because we’ve invited more people in, and because we didn’t bully them out all of the thinner skinned people like me.

    Is programming really worse off for having a bit of diversity in it, even if the cost of that diversity is that we have to make special allowances for people who aren't thoughtless assholes?



  • @Buddy said:

    diversity

    In terms of skill? Yeah. It's better off having good programmers than bad programmers, duh.

    Be it open source projects or multi-million corporations, you don't want bad programmers to fuck with your code. Why would we want to accomodate them at their present skill level?

    @Buddy said:

    How the fuck else are people gonna gain technical ability except by writing code?

    Does that mean every scrap of code they write is worthy releasing to public? If you're a beginner artist, it's normal to doodle and sketch for training, but you generally don't bring those to an auction unless you're already so good that even your scraps have artistic value.



  • It's github, not the fucking louvre. And I'm still not seeing how getting more people involved in oss projects is going to lead to a decrease in the number of skilled programmers in the world.



  • There's place for both the open-arms noob-happy and no-nonsense only-leets-allowed style projects. Different styles of management are best suited for different kinds of projects.

    My beef is with this goody-two-shoes idea that the One Right Way to run a project is to create a nurturing environment where every skill level is welcome and maintainers are always there to educate as well as lead. Anything less than that, and weasel words like "toxic personality" start being thrown around.

    Bullshit. Sometimes the stakes are such that you really need no-nonsense our-way-or-the-highway style to get things done. Case in point - the army. Is the sergeant who's screaming insults at the recruit who forgot to clean his gun a "toxic personality"? Or is this just the correct way to manage this particular situation in this specific institution?

    I'm not saying that every irritable Linus Torvalds-like maintainer is correct to lead the project the way they do. Just that setting this kind of blanket policy is a feel-good circlejerk that optimizes one specific aspect of OSS at the cost of many others.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    If you're a beginner artist, it's normal to doodle and sketch for training, but you generally don't bring those to an auction unless you're already so good that even your scraps have artistic value.

    Times have changed. There are thousands of people making mediocre pictures on DeviantArt etc.

    @cartman82 said:

    Case in point - the army. Is the sergeant who's screaming insults at the recruit who forgot to clean his gun a "toxic personality"? Or is this just the correct way to manage this particular situation in this specific institution?

    Depends on which side of the pond you are on.



  • @Buddy said:

    And I'm still not seeing how getting more people involved in oss projects is going to lead to a decrease in the number of skilled programmers in the world.

    Skilled programmers look at all the reams of shitty code, get depressed, decide to migrate to Siberia, open an apiary and live the lives of nomads. Or something.

    @Buddy said:

    It's github, not the fucking louvre.

    But I still fail to see why we should go out of our way to accomodate them. They can still push whatever they want on GH, there's no quality control, but "honoring diversity in technical ability" is such an ass-backwards concept it blows my mind.

    It's like a PC nightmare where people who suck at their jobs start yelling that they're being discriminated against. TDEMSYR.



  • @Gaska said:

    There are thousands of people making mediocre pictures on DeviantArt etc.

    To the despair of all the people with the modicum of aesthetic sense.



  • Well, that's the great thing about git: it supports a centralized workflow, where a single authoritarian leader can keep the main repo on their own machine, and have final say on every change that does or doesn't make it into a release. What does Torvalds need github for in the first place?



  • It says technical ability, not talent. Look, if you only want to hire developers with at least ten years of experience and a post-graduate degree, go for it. I'm pretty sure github's not gonna come breaking down doors and lynch you for not being PC enough. But apparently they want to provide a more noob-friendly environment on their site, and that seems like a really good idea to me.



  • @Buddy said:

    Well, that's the great thing about git: it supports a centralized workflow, where a single authoritarian leader can keep the main repo on their own machine, and have final say on every change that does or doesn't make it into a release. What does Torvalds need github for in the first place?

    Why would anyone use a popular public service as opposed to hosting their own infrastructure? Take a wild guess.

    Also, I'm pretty sure Torvalds isn't using github. Poor github, I bet they'd have loved to be able to kick Torvalds out for being such a big bad elitist meany. How tragic that 99.99% of github repos are actually extremely professional in their conduct and there's no big evil for github SJW-s to rail against.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Buddy said:

    Requiring people be “tough enough” to participate reminds me of the dark ages of OSS development, back in the 90s when, IMO, many of “popular” free and open source software communities were hostile to all but “typical” hackers. It wasn’t a better time. It was awful. We had fewer and less diverse participants in OSS development and were less effective at it as a result. T

    Wait, are they saying we're better at OSS development now than we were in the 90s????? Paging @blakeyrat...

    @Maciejasjmj said:

    They can still push whatever they want on GH, there's no quality control

    Well, that's the thing. There aren't any barriers to entry other than being able to access the Internet and having somewhere to edit code. This is only an issue for people who value diversity for its own sake. On the internet, no one knows you're a dog.



  • @antiquarian said:

    Wait, are they saying we're better at OSS development now than we were in the 90s????? Paging @blakeyrat...

    Ugh.

    I have no idea what OSS development was like in the 90s. My guess is: a hellish nightmare.

    Hell, I don't really know what it's like now. I just know they always ignore their bug trackers, and the end-product is almost always shitty.

    Is Buddy trying to imply that OSS is no longer like that? Because those motherfuckers use Git and mailing lists to do all their work. I can't think of anything more hostile to "all but 'typical' hackers".


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    Is Buddy trying to imply that OSS is no longer like that?

    That's actually from an article comment that he posted, but he appears to agree with the comment. In short, yes.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.