gon [he]

I hate how relatable this is.

That is one of the most horrible things I have ever fucking read.

I know people on here hate it because of one (admittedly not at all nice) gender issue in the codes comments but like… seriously?

I actually recently had a discussion about this very issue and came to see it as a case of poor communication, rather than anything mean-spirited on the devs’ part.

Right, but the policy was commit hygiene (lots of small commits), which has nothing to do with the “no politics” policy. It’s right there in the comment, and the suggestion is to squash the commits into one.

Suspiciously close to what Hitler would say… /s

And this is BuggieBot’s comment:

Yeah I was referencing that comment.

Sequence of events:

1. PR trying to change pronouns.
2. Automated response citing policy.
3. Author takes note of it for blog post.
4. PR fixed and merged.
5. Blog post published.

Precocious, certainly, and I agree it was misguided. The blog post was indeed emotionally motivated, that’s more than clear.

Sorry to beat a dead horse here

It’s alright. I think these discussions need to be had.

Sigh, you do have a point.

Maybe this was by a different reviewer, idk.

It was. Some other member of SerenityOS, not the person behind Ladybird (awesomekling).

blog author should be more accurate (see above)

That’s fair. I’ll say though, the blog post is dated from 1 day after the PR was actually merged. It’s not unreasonable to think that, when they wrote it, it really hadn’t been merged and they only saw the initial denial citing the policy.

He may be. Idk.

Yeah, I was just trying to say that that wasn’t the point of my rant. I get it I get it.

I would’ve rejected the PR too, but not for violation of that rule, but because one-line changes that merely fix a comment waste everyone’s time reviewing it, and are often just to build someone’s resume.

That’s exactly what I was talking about. You’re taking what they said reasonably, because you’re probably a reasonable person! However, look at what they’re actually saying. The issue wasn’t framed as being a “drive-by,” though later that’s what they claimed. It was about ideology. It was about politics. They didn’t pull up rules about one-line changes to justify not accepting them, they pulled up rules about talking politics.

The problem wasn’t that it was a meaningless PR, the problem was that it was a meaningful PR that they disagreed with.

And, quite frankly, disagreeing with that does make you an asshole, at the very least, and a transphobic misogynist, at worst. There were at least a few PRs open about similar issues, too.

Look, I’m not calling him a transphobe or a misogynist; I’m just saying this was an asshole thing to do, and it was done in an asshole way, and that allowing this sort of thing to exist, especially in FOSS, is not good. That’s all.

Check this out: https://mkultra.monster/tech/2024/07/03/serenityos-and-ladybird

That blog post is pretty ridiculous, IMO.

You’ll see the alt-right do that a lot, for some reason.

There’s real criticism, but they always mix it in with some made-up complaints like the slavery thing, which is some of the most obvious sarcasm I have ever seen on the internet, but somehow taken literally by the author of the post.

IDK if he’s a transphobe or whatnot, but his reaction to the change in language was indicative of, at the very least—with the most charitable of interpretations—, a disregard for inclusive language and, more realistically, some philosophy that doesn’t allow for “others” to participate because the existence of those that aren’t male is “political,” somehow.

You might not see it, because you haven’t seen it enough times to recognize it, but it happens again and again and again… But it’s always quiet.

“Don’t make this political,” “ideology isn’t welcome,” stuff like that. Statements that sound reasonable, but are only wielded to quiet those aiming for inclusiveness and acceptance of marginalized people.

It might sound like a less-than-generous interpretation, a bit callous and over-zealous, but it’s just patterns. I hear wolf, I say wolf.

Also, I thought that article had a really funny passage:

One activist (“cafkafk”) seen below, within the GitHub repository for the developer being attacked, celebrating the fact that other activists – organized on “The Fediverse” – had arrived to harass the Ladybird developer.

This alone made me think that it might be satire, but I don’t think it is… The Fediverse, huh? OK.

Thank you for sharing.

This isn’t good, though. The whole point of the Fediverse is to be a decentralized network. If we push everyone to a single server, we’re centralizing the network!

This comes with added expenses for the maintainers, for one, and increases privacy and data-protection concerns as well.

Also, Mastodon actually already funnels people towards .social, though they don’t push it too hard. Check out joinmastodon.org and see for yourself.

IMO, the solution needs to be something like a server auto-selector, where the location of the user is taken into account, weighted by the number of active users on the server, and using some sort of vetting system to try to avoid sending people to unmaintained servers (like only selecting servers with a certain degree of uptime and uptime stability).

Not the case, necessarily.

In Portugal, for example, it’s legal to download pirated content. It’s not a matter of not pursuing it because it’s hard or being difficult to catch or distributors are an easier target, it’s just that, legally, you’re not doing anything wrong.

That’s nuts

Is that actually real?

That is so fucking funny.

Oh, I see how it is. They keep killing and killing, but we hit ONE CEO and shit hits the fan. Alright, then.

This is the reference. It’s a dotgov.

that’s the coolest part of MC imo

god eugc get google’s cock out of your ass PLEASE