this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
127 points (99.2% liked)

Free and Open Source Software

17517 readers
140 users here now

If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

All this engagement seems to be suspicious... Pls do not kill a promising project 🙏

[–] secret300@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 21 hours ago

Ladybird seems to have a lot of excitement and big names around it right now which is making me really doubt it...

[–] millie@beehaw.org 99 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (21 children)

Who cares? It's run by reactionary incels, transphobes, and racists. https://cmdr-nova.online/2024/07/03/serenityos-and-ladybird/

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 86 points 3 days ago (8 children)

Who cares? It’s run by reactionary incels, transphobes, and racists.

Wait until you find out who runs Lemmy development.

[–] highduc@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 days ago

Lemmy devs are awesome. 1 more reason to use the platform.

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good news, most folks at beehaw know and the admins have decided to move to a new platform

[–] remington@beehaw.org 46 points 2 days ago (32 children)

Correct. We're moving to Sublinks very soon. Buckle up.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Is it anywhere near ready yet?

[–] storksforlegs@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a lot of work, give them time

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago

I'm not the one saying they're gonna switch to it very soon

[–] remington@beehaw.org 5 points 1 day ago

I can't give you a date. However, I can say it will be very soon.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 20 points 2 days ago (11 children)

oh boy I can't wait for all of the integrations to break

also is it just me or is deciding what software you use and do not pay for based on the political views of the people who create it (who again in no way benefit from its use by people who don't donate) incredibly fucking stupid

[–] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 1 points 16 hours ago

based on the political views of the people who create it

That is not the reason for the Beehaw switching to another platform, but here's a few of the true reasons why.

[–] Lionir@beehaw.org 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't call people "incredibly fucking stupid". Be(e) nice.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

i'm not calling people stupid, i'm calling an idea stupid. is that also not kosher?

[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 3 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

It is absolutely a reasonable interpretation to assume you were referring to the people making the decision you didn't like. And even if it wasn't, calling an idea a group of people have "incredibly fucking stupid" isn't much different, as it carries an implication of how you see those people.

If you feel other people are getting offended too easily at what you say, I recommend spending extra time on your posts to ensure you avoid saying derogatory things you don't intend for. Something that looks good to you can be incredibly insulting to others who read differently from you, and since conversation is a two-way street, that's the kind of thing we all need to be aware of.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

so you're saying i should have anticipated that people might have willingly misinterpreted "that is a stupid position to take and here is why" as "you as a person are stupid" and, instead of telling me why they thought I was wrong, try to get me banned from beehaw as a result?

i would've been okay if you'd just said yes and left it at that. but the "actually, you are calling me stupid" really rubs my fur backwards

[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

I’m saying that if you think you said “that is a stupid position to take and here is why,” you missed the mark severely, and you should be more careful with your phrasing if you don’t want people to get upset at you in future. It’s not about people “willingly” misinterpreting anything — whether you realized it or not, what you said wasn’t the level-headed response you may have intended it to be.

[–] chamomile@furry.engineer 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

@AVincentInSpace @remington The Lemmy devs are infamously difficult to work with. They've repeatedly shown an unwillingness to even acknowledge the existence of the many problems that instance admins face. That has been a big driver in Beehaw's decision to move platforms, not just because of a difference in political views, and they've been pretty open about discussing it. You're way off-base.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I've no love lost for the developers in question. But between the original two PRs and associated comments being from over three years ago, and the "trans woman [being called] 'spam" comment being said about a PR that seems pretty strongly to me to be meant as a sarcastic insult rather than a genuine contribution, I can't help but find it a little unconvincing.

It's not without merit by far. I feel that Kling's blog post not addressing the drama was in poor taste and may indicate a lack of self-improvement regarding the initial fuckup, and saying you want to "avoid alienating people" when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic. I also understand not wanting bigots to be able to just bury their past and pretend they were never bigoted. It's just that the fiery response this has gotten still ends up feeling a bit disproportionate given how old the truly insulting issues were. Am I missing something?

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You seem to have missed this third PR, that was genuine, three days ago. It seemed to be the cause of the trans woman's sarcastic PR. The author of the article does mention it.

[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

I saw that one. It's what I was referring to when I said "saying you want to 'avoid alienating people' when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic." Criticizing the maintainer response there was one of the good parts of the blog post.

But the outcome of that doesn't really much change the fact that the sarcastic PR was sarcastic, and thus calling that PR spam is reasonable, whereas claiming they called the trans woman herself spam is not. To be clear, however: I've no issue with the sarcastic PR itself, only the framing of it in the blog post.

[–] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 54 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I wonder why that person decided to stir drama now. I guess they must've been upset after Ladybird got a good amount of investment money or something?

Seems like a lot of exaggerated claims of malice to me, even for Github drama. Assuming someone is transphobic for closing a trans person's PR quite the stretch.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 44 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (10 children)

Didn't they fly off the handle on someone for politely pointing out that the text shouldn't use the word "he" and assume that every user is male?

That's not political, thats flat out unprofessional. I would think it's a pretty junior mistake if any of my colleagues filed a non-gender neutral PR in the first place, and would flat out fire them if they ever reacted to a review that unprofessionally.

[–] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 27 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I found both sides rather aggressive to be honest. The implication that the use of "he" implies that the author assumes every user is male comes with an implied accusation of some form of misogyny. The aggressive defence again at the implication went too far, but the implication of malice was unnecessary, especially for an unknown outsider butting in.

Furthermore, the "generic he" has also been acceptable English for centuries, and has only been starting to be phased out in the past few decades. In high school, some of my English study materials still came from thirty years before, and certainly didn't contain gender neutral words like "postperson". Singular "they" may have been around since the 14th century but that doesn't mean it was commonplace. My native language doesn't have an equivalent for the singular they, so I'll probably use "he" in wrong places. Accusing me of not considering female users because I'm not a native English speaker certainly won't make me want to help you (though I'd probably just ignore you rather than shut you down; then again, I'm not recovering from substance addiction like the original author was back in the day, so that's not hard for me to do).

[–] millie@beehaw.org 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean, the whole point is kind of that the problem is getting defensive rather than making a change.

That's the root of a lot of these problems. People are intimidated by 'wokeness' because they think that caring about how they affect other people means that if they have the wrong idea they're irredeemable. Clearly that isn't compatible with continuing to feel alright about themselves, so they become defensive and double down. But the reality is, if they'd just like, quit it with the callousness and cruelty they'd be eliminating the problem to begin with.

Lack of acknowledgement of there being an issue becomes the primary motivator for making the issue worse.

It's like becoming a hoarder because you're too embarrassed to acknowledge what a mess your house is to clean it. Rather than pick the trash up off the floor, they shout about how clean their house really is and how deluded we all are for talking about the smell.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I found both sides rather aggressive to be honest. The implication that the use of "he" implies that the author assumes every user is male comes with an implied accusation of some form of misogyny.

No, it didn't. Go read the PR, it's extremely polite. I in fact, would challenge you to try and think of a more polite and less accusatory way of bringing up the same issue. I can't.

Furthermore, the "generic he" has also been acceptable English for centuries, and has only been starting to be phased out in the past few decades.

Yeah, you know what else has only been around for the past "few" decades? Literally every single computer and piece of software ever made, you know what literally none of them do? Refer to their users as "he".

You want to make it sound like it's a simple ESL mistake? That's fine you're welcome to believe that, but do you know how I respond to translation mistakes when I'm speaking a foreign language? I laugh and say oops, sorry, my mistake I'll fix that. I don't say "don't bring your politics into this".

I'm sorry but you are making up a fantasy to try and believe that the author wasn't being an explicit asshole.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Steve@communick.news 49 points 3 days ago (19 children)

Sometimes terrible people can do good things.
Those good things should be supported.
Judge a project on it own merits.

People still use the Autobahn.

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (28 children)

"What about the good things Hitler did?" Is not the flex you think it is. Also, using the Autobahn does not send support to Nazis

load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 3 days ago (12 children)

Boring hit piece that way overblows some issues on the topic.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 3 days ago (8 children)

saying 'no code' from rivals seems highly misleading, and I can't seem to see a hard citation for this, in fact, it very directly contradicts this same sentence from the article

He also said that unlike SerenityOS, Ladybird will “leverage the greater OSS ecosystem,” meaning that it will use other open source libraries for some features.

it would be better to say they aren't relying on libraries and features from rivals. not that they will use "no code" from them, good code is good code afterall

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›