Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
Control: severity -1 wishlist It is clear that there is no concensus on this issue. It is not a technical problem with the code, but a question of opinions. Because of this, I set severity to wishlist. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 13:53:43 +0100 Leon van Kammen wrote: > my few cents: the problem with censorship is, once you start, the > rabbithole is infinite. > Whatever shitty homepage or comment it is, eventually it's just a homepage > or comment. > I think debian-devs should not be going down the rabbithole of scanning all > code for 'bad' words, bad images, suspicious logos etc, as the creativity > of humans in infinite too.. > The reactive path also plays in the hands of those activists (expect > "debian turns out to be ran by X" youtube vids). Cat't agree more. The offensive content has been patched out already there is no merit to keep digging down on it more and more. This package is actually useful as Petter already stated clearly, so removing it just on the basis of a homepage does not seem good. A sensible compromise maybe to remove the homepage field from d/control if that serves the purpose. Debian was always about technology and shall always be about that (let's not forget that at the end of the day it is an operating system). Imposing debian values over each line of code over each package makes it no longer fully focussed about technology. We can't and shouldn't expect each upstream's ideologies to be same as ours, that's literally impossible. I personally value inclusiveness, being excellent to people a lot but those things should be applied to developers/contributors engaging in debian. Not for each and every package's contributors that lands in debian. I doubt if a user is going to migrate all the way through the source code, and visit upstream homepage and get offended because _we_ vendor the software. In the end it's our and the user's loss because a useful software would be dropped out of the bag for reasons not related to technical aspect. In the end, you will do what you want (i.e. maybe removing the package and I know that) but I just wanted to speak up. (And I see this as a different case as compared to the fortunes-off thing as this does not spit that kind of virtiol onto user's terminal after the patch) -- Best, Nilesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
my few cents: the problem with censorship is, once you start, the rabbithole is infinite. Whatever shitty homepage or comment it is, eventually it's just a homepage or comment. I think debian-devs should not be going down the rabbithole of scanning all code for 'bad' words, bad images, suspicious logos etc, as the creativity of humans in infinite too.. The reactive path also plays in the hands of those activists (expect "debian turns out to be ran by X" youtube vids). kind regards Leon (and hi if we haven't met yet) On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:12 PM Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > Personally I find the story of Daryl Davis inspiring, and believe such > approach have higher chances of success than one using contempt and > rejection. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis > > https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes > > > > The Homepage URL is a statement of fact about a package, ie its origin > and where users can check out the upstream information. It is also > useful to track down upstream if it move in the future. It is not a > useful marketing channel, but can improve search engine ranking slightly > due to its use within Debian. I believe the advantages of machine > readable links to the package origin outweigh any improved search > ranking, as I believe the latter is very minuscule. > > If I understand the objections about the code, it is about the strings > '#WLM' and 'Nanos gigantum humeris insidentes.'. The former seem to be > a reference to 'white lives matters', a sad reaction to the 'black lives > matter' movement that have gained traction the last few years[1], and > the latter is a reference to a cristian quote initially from Bernard of > Chartres, according to wikipedia[2], and later made more known by Isac > Newton. As I see it these strings have no operational function for the > software and I have no attachment to them whatsoever. I understand that > the objections is regarding believed intent behind the strings. I do > not see any point in spending time discussing them, and thus removed > them from the binary. In my opinion they have no marketing or > promotional value in the source, so I see very little gain from taking > the extra work to repack the tarball with these 9 lines from the source > code > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Lives_Matter > > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants > > > -- > Happy hacking > Petter Reinholdtsen > > -- L Ξ Ο N V Λ N Κ Λ Μ Μ Ξ N Senior creative technologist & researcher https://2wa.isvery.ninja/hello https://www.linkedin.com/in/leonvankammen
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
Personally I find the story of Daryl Davis inspiring, and believe such approach have higher chances of success than one using contempt and rejection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis > https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes > The Homepage URL is a statement of fact about a package, ie its origin and where users can check out the upstream information. It is also useful to track down upstream if it move in the future. It is not a useful marketing channel, but can improve search engine ranking slightly due to its use within Debian. I believe the advantages of machine readable links to the package origin outweigh any improved search ranking, as I believe the latter is very minuscule. If I understand the objections about the code, it is about the strings '#WLM' and 'Nanos gigantum humeris insidentes.'. The former seem to be a reference to 'white lives matters', a sad reaction to the 'black lives matter' movement that have gained traction the last few years[1], and the latter is a reference to a cristian quote initially from Bernard of Chartres, according to wikipedia[2], and later made more known by Isac Newton. As I see it these strings have no operational function for the software and I have no attachment to them whatsoever. I understand that the objections is regarding believed intent behind the strings. I do not see any point in spending time discussing them, and thus removed them from the binary. In my opinion they have no marketing or promotional value in the source, so I see very little gain from taking the extra work to repack the tarball with these 9 lines from the source code [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Lives_Matter > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants > -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:12:32PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: >[Christoph Berg] > >> It's not just "views" of the author. The crap is deeply embedded into >> the source code. This thing needs to go. > >Where and what is this 'crap' that is 'deeply embedded into the source >code'? Are we talking about the stuff disabled by >debian/patches/2000-non-controversial-usage.patch or something else? There's still a link to his moronic racist views in the Debian packaging itself (the Homepage field), and the stuff you've patched out is still in the source we distribute. At the very least they should be removed IMHO. >A friend of mine from USA visites this summer, and said he was impressed >that in my country people with opposing views were able to talk together >and treat each other with respect. I believe it is a property that is >worth protecting, as the way to change peoples mind is by treating them >with respend and communicating with them as fellow humans. There's a difference in degree here that I hope you might recognise? We like to discuss different opinions, sure. But hatred of others is not a worthy *opinion*. Distributing and linking to racist propaganda is really *not* something Debian should be doing. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com "Every time you use Tcl, God kills a kitten." -- Malcolm Ray
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
[Christoph Berg] > By playing innocent and claiming that this would be "cancel culture", > you are effectively promoting these views. No, I am not. Exceptional claims require exceptional proofs. > It's not just "views" of the author. The crap is deeply embedded into > the source code. This thing needs to go. Where and what is this 'crap' that is 'deeply embedded into the source code'? Are we talking about the stuff disabled by debian/patches/2000-non-controversial-usage.patch or something else? A friend of mine from USA visites this summer, and said he was impressed that in my country people with opposing views were able to talk together and treat each other with respect. I believe it is a property that is worth protecting, as the way to change peoples mind is by treating them with respend and communicating with them as fellow humans. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
Re: Petter Reinholdtsen > I do not buy into the cancel culture. I further do not find the guilt by > association argument (his web page is full of bad stuff, so his software > is bad) convincing. In short, I fail to see it as an argument for > removing bs1770gain from Debian. By playing innocent and claiming that this would be "cancel culture", you are effectively promoting these views. The problem is within bs1770gain, not the rest of Debian. > I removed the controversial text from the running program in response to > #913352, and see no point is doing anything more with that issue. That is by far not enough. The homepage header is still pointing directly to a page with clear nazi content. And even if you remove that, the racism/fascist/nazi crap still part of the source code that we ship. > The bs1770gain program is an excellent tool to adjust the sound level of > media files, and I do not care much about any real or percived political > views of its author. I see no need to spend time studying it, nor > comment on my view of it, in a Debian context. It's not just "views" of the author. The crap is deeply embedded into the source code. This thing needs to go. Christoph
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
I do not buy into the cancel culture. I further do not find the guilt by association argument (his web page is full of bad stuff, so his software is bad) convincing. In short, I fail to see it as an argument for removing bs1770gain from Debian. I removed the controversial text from the running program in response to #913352, and see no point is doing anything more with that issue. The bs1770gain program is an excellent tool to adjust the sound level of media files, and I do not care much about any real or percived political views of its author. I see no need to spend time studying it, nor comment on my view of it, in a Debian context. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
Re: Ansgar > I proposed to remove bs1770gain from Debian. Besides the problem from > #913352, the upstream homepage and domain that we direct users to (via > Homepage: field and other places) contain extremist content. > > I don't think it's worth distributing software that does this in > Debian. +1. The homepage is full of nazi symbols. Let's get rid of it. > If there are no objections from the maintainers, I'll reassign this to > ftp.d.o in the next days. Might be worth considering removal from stable as well. Christoph
Bug#1024493: Proposed-RM: bs1770gain -- RoQA; inappropriate content
Source: bs1770gain Version: 0.6.5-1 Severity: serious Hi, I proposed to remove bs1770gain from Debian. Besides the problem from #913352, the upstream homepage and domain that we direct users to (via Homepage: field and other places) contain extremist content. I don't think it's worth distributing software that does this in Debian. If there are no objections from the maintainers, I'll reassign this to ftp.d.o in the next days. Ansgar
