Words mean things, and the Fedora package is every bit as "professional" as any other Linux distro. -ww
actually, it's not, it is explicitly a hobbyist distro.
see the website.
-sv -------------------- My point, exactly. You purchase Mandrake, Xandros, or SuSe. You download Fedora Core, Debian, Slackware, etc. "Professionals" get paid and do what they do for a living.
The best idea so far, is to divide the screensavers into three packages.
-wally
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 06:12:45AM -0800, Wally Wilson wrote:
The best idea so far, is to divide the screensavers into three packages.
Honestly, I don't see any point in the "third" package. The FC3 "sanitize" really ought to be plenty. And I see no compelling reason to put those things _back_ -- if you really need screensavers that sometimes say "penis" or "boobies", rebuild the package.
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 09:30 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 06:12:45AM -0800, Wally Wilson wrote:
The best idea so far, is to divide the screensavers into three packages.
Honestly, I don't see any point in the "third" package. The FC3 "sanitize" really ought to be plenty. And I see no compelling reason to put those things _back_ -- if you really need screensavers that sometimes say "penis" or "boobies", rebuild the package.
What about when the crazies continue to take their toll?
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
No. Don't censor yourself b/c some people are too afraid to deal with a little discomfort. Let them rebuild the package if they want to remove something _they_ think is offensive.
this is ridiculous.
-sv
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, seth vidal wrote:
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 09:30 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 06:12:45AM -0800, Wally Wilson wrote:
The best idea so far, is to divide the screensavers into three packages.
Honestly, I don't see any point in the "third" package. The FC3 "sanitize" really ought to be plenty. And I see no compelling reason to put those things _back_ -- if you really need screensavers that sometimes say "penis" or "boobies", rebuild the package.
What about when the crazies continue to take their toll?
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
No. Don't censor yourself b/c some people are too afraid to deal with a little discomfort. Let them rebuild the package if they want to remove something _they_ think is offensive.
this is ridiculous.
+1
Maybe we should just remove all of the words from everywhere so we can be sure never to offend anyone. :-) FWIW, I seem to remember a thread, where in some non-english speaking country the word Fedora was offensive. Where does this kind of stuff stop?
OTOH, I suppose worthless threads like these are a good sign things are working pretty much as expected, otherwise there would not be time to debate this kind of stuff. :-)
Regards,
Tom
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 09:32:11AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
This is a slippery-slope argument. I think a reasonable determination of "words likely to embarrass Eric Troan when shown on the big screen at OLS" can be made. :)
No. Don't censor yourself b/c some people are too afraid to deal with a little discomfort. Let them rebuild the package if they want to remove something _they_ think is offensive.
So you think the current patch should be backed out?
Hmmm.
Maybe the screensaver should be patched to use /usr/share/dict/words instead of its own little idiosyncratic list.
Matthew Miller wrote:
Maybe the screensaver should be patched to use /usr/share/dict/words instead of its own little idiosyncratic list.
/usr/share/dict/works contains the following unprofessional words:
erection atheism sex sexed sexes sexual sexuality screw breast fornication
etc etc...
what we actually need is a "Department of Fedora Professionalism" board that could censor^H^H^H^H^H^H review all words contained anywhere in the distribution to avoid offending anyone...
either that or people could grow up. :-)
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 10:43 -0500, Aaron Bennett wrote:
Matthew Miller wrote:
Maybe the screensaver should be patched to use /usr/share/dict/words instead of its own little idiosyncratic list.
/usr/share/dict/works contains the following unprofessional words:
erection atheism sex sexed sexes sexual sexuality screw
What is wrong with a screw? I am fairly certain builds are screwing things all the time, be it would, metal, I suppose they use bolts more then screws on cement...
How is a screw in any way a dirty word?
Oh!!! You had sex on the mind? Is that our fault?
breast fornication
etc etc...
what we actually need is a "Department of Fedora Professionalism" board that could censor^H^H^H^H^H^H review all words contained anywhere in the distribution to avoid offending anyone...
either that or people could grow up. :-)
Oh thank god for that...
This just gets silly, you know?
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 10:43:51AM -0500, Aaron Bennett wrote:
/usr/share/dict/works contains the following unprofessional words:
Yep. But it's a big dictionary of common words, not a picked list. And let's be realistic -- the existing list appears hand-picked to contain controversial terms. I personally find it amusing, but I understand why others don't. I also think that the line drawn by the existing 'sanitize' patch is reasonable.
This has really gone on a long time,
My absolute last recommendation on this topic is: The effort, however small, to address this "issue" is simply not worth it.
Ignorance is no excuse, it is the sys admin's job to know how to install and configure the OS.
Mission Critical, and Professional Systems should consider using RHEL.
Cheers All. -Jason
Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 10:43:51AM -0500, Aaron Bennett wrote:
/usr/share/dict/works contains the following unprofessional words:
Yep. But it's a big dictionary of common words, not a picked list. And let's be realistic -- the existing list appears hand-picked to contain controversial terms. I personally find it amusing, but I understand why others don't. I also think that the line drawn by the existing 'sanitize' patch is reasonable.
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 19.29 skrev Jason Knight:
This has really gone on a long time,
My absolute last recommendation on this topic is: The effort, however small, to address this "issue" is simply not worth it.
Ignorance is no excuse, it is the sys admin's job to know how to install and configure the OS.
Mission Critical, and Professional Systems should consider using RHEL.
So RHL has removed it?
Cheers All. -Jason
Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 10:43:51AM -0500, Aaron Bennett wrote:
/usr/share/dict/works contains the following unprofessional words:
Yep. But it's a big dictionary of common words, not a picked list. And let's be realistic -- the existing list appears hand-picked to contain controversial terms. I personally find it amusing, but I understand why others don't. I also think that the line drawn by the existing 'sanitize' patch is reasonable.
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 10:28, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 09:32:11AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
This is a slippery-slope argument. I think a reasonable determination of "words likely to embarrass Eric Troan when shown on the big screen at OLS" can be made. :)
Guess what, I bet everyone there thought it was funny and silly. But not offensive. Eric obviously wasn't too worried about it.
-sv
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 10:55:37AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
This is a slippery-slope argument. I think a reasonable determination of "words likely to embarrass Eric Troan when shown on the big screen at OLS" can be made. :)
Guess what, I bet everyone there thought it was funny and silly. But not offensive. Eric obviously wasn't too worried about it.
I know. I hope you don't think I'm taking this too seriously. But clearly, it's reasonable for there to be a line somewhere -- a "standard", if you will. Would you argue so strongly if the original list contained, say, "fuck"?
I know. I hope you don't think I'm taking this too seriously. But clearly, it's reasonable for there to be a line somewhere -- a "standard", if you will. Would you argue so strongly if the original list contained, say, "fuck"?
No, There is not a reasonable line. It is only determinable based on your local standards. That means the local administrator must make those decisions.
All words are offensive to someone.
-sv
seth vidal (skvidal@phy.duke.edu) said:
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 10:28, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 09:32:11AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
This is a slippery-slope argument. I think a reasonable determination of "words likely to embarrass Eric Troan when shown on the big screen at OLS" can be made. :)
Guess what, I bet everyone there thought it was funny and silly. But not offensive. Eric obviously wasn't too worried about it.
I'd expect Erik would be more concerned about spelling his name right in this thread. :)
Bill
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 02:06:28PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Guess what, I bet everyone there thought it was funny and silly. But not offensive. Eric obviously wasn't too worried about it.
I'd expect Erik would be more concerned about spelling his name right in this thread. :)
Hmmm. Maybe the barcode screensaver should be patched to be a credits list rather than random words. :)
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 14:11 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
Guess what, I bet everyone there thought it was funny and silly. But not offensive. Eric obviously wasn't too worried about it.
I'd expect Erik would be more concerned about spelling his name right in this thread. :)
Hmmm. Maybe the barcode screensaver should be patched to be a credits list rather than random words. :)
If ya'll want changes, best to submit this upstream to jwz
(who will just laugh at you)
And no, this isn't singling Matt out, its the entire thread in general. As Seth keeps on saying, some word is offensive at some time to someone. Let's not get overly emotional - we do want things to be "professional", but let's not take out the "fun" out of Linux too
This isn't the first time a screensaver related thread has come out (read the glorious archives). Maybe we should find a fix for FC4 - default is blank, xscreensaver-extras gets everything else
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 15.32 skrev seth vidal:
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 09:30 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 06:12:45AM -0800, Wally Wilson wrote:
The best idea so far, is to divide the screensavers into three packages.
Honestly, I don't see any point in the "third" package. The FC3 "sanitize" really ought to be plenty. And I see no compelling reason to put those things _back_ -- if you really need screensavers that sometimes say "penis" or "boobies", rebuild the package.
What about when the crazies continue to take their toll?
Should the word 'breast' be removed? How about 'atheist'? Is 'liberal' a dirty word, too?
No. Don't censor yourself b/c some people are too afraid to deal with a little discomfort. Let them rebuild the package if they want to remove something _they_ think is offensive.
this is ridiculous.
-sv
I understand your point (and i have no problems with it *myself*), but if my manager came to me complaining about "hey! That new Linux-thingy, you installed, it popped up "penis" on my projector, while i was presenting our might-be new customers a new product!" and i never even had thought of the posibility - i would have been bloody damn embarassed and angry.
Kyrre Ness Sjøbæk Atheist, liberal, and socialist.
I understand your point (and i have no problems with it *myself*), but if my manager came to me complaining about "hey! That new Linux-thingy, you installed, it popped up "penis" on my projector, while i was presenting our might-be new customers a new product!" and i never even had thought of the posibility - i would have been bloody damn embarassed and angry.
So you're kowtowing to a purely hypothetical, corporate, prurient interest?
I don't want a distribution I work on censored b/c someone is afraid their screensaver might offend a customer.
If people are concerned about 'decency' in certain packages then let them add a distribution-nanny package that cleans these things up.
yum install frightened_of_naughty_words.noarch
-sv
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 16.45 skrev seth vidal:
I understand your point (and i have no problems with it *myself*), but if my manager came to me complaining about "hey! That new Linux-thingy, you installed, it popped up "penis" on my projector, while i was presenting our might-be new customers a new product!" and i never even had thought of the posibility - i would have been bloody damn embarassed and angry.
So you're kowtowing to a purely hypothetical, corporate, prurient interest?
No, i am not. On my *personal* desktop i would not have any problem with porn pictures being the default screensaver (unless my mother saw it...) - as i know how to find the screensaver control dialog. I would just find it stupid, childish, and generally looking like something two teenage boys had programmed at night.
We don't want Linux/RH/Fedora/etc to look like something programmed by two High School students, we want it to look like the rock solid, professional piece of software it *IS*. Something that just does what it should do, and nothing else. Something you can thrust.
I don't want a distribution I work on censored b/c someone is afraid their screensaver might offend a customer. If people are concerned about 'decency' in certain packages then let them add a distribution-nanny package that cleans these things up.
yum install frightened_of_naughty_words.noarch
or "yum install naugty_words"
Kyrre.
I don't want a distribution I work on censored b/c someone is afraid their screensaver might offend a customer. If people are concerned about 'decency' in certain packages then let them add a distribution-nanny package that cleans these things up.
yum install frightened_of_naughty_words.noarch
or "yum install naugty_words"
I don't want other people making the determination for me what is or is not a 'naughty word'. There are a whole set of words that I believe might be considered inappropriate depending on one's religion that I would not want removed at all.
Local mores are the responsibility of the Local Administrator. If you feel certain words will be found to be offensive by your users then YOU have to remove them.
We will not find a group of words that is commonly accepted as offensive. -sv
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 20.34 skrev seth vidal:
I don't want a distribution I work on censored b/c someone is afraid their screensaver might offend a customer. If people are concerned about 'decency' in certain packages then let them add a distribution-nanny package that cleans these things up.
yum install frightened_of_naughty_words.noarch
or "yum install naugty_words"
I don't want other people making the determination for me what is or is not a 'naughty word'. There are a whole set of words that I believe might be considered inappropriate depending on one's religion that I would not want removed at all.
Local mores are the responsibility of the Local Administrator. If you feel certain words will be found to be offensive by your users then YOU have to remove them.
We will not find a group of words that is commonly accepted as offensive. -sv
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
What if I happen to be in the world's oldest profession?
I think you're generalizing overly much and making far too sweeping assumptions about mores and values.
-sv
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 03:00:44PM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
What if I happen to be in the world's oldest profession? I think you're generalizing overly much and making far too sweeping assumptions about mores and values.
But, y'know, we could apply the advice George Carlin gave his daughter.
http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/04/03/carlin/
(If you can't trust George Carlin's moral judgement on this issue, who *can* you trust? [Appeal to authority])
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 21.00 skrev seth vidal:
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
What if I happen to be in the world's oldest profession?
You are not. Unless the physics dept. at duke is something else than i might believe.
I think you're generalizing overly much and making far too sweeping assumptions about mores and values.
-sv
I might. But who will miss it?
It is a reason Apple and even M$ don't ship screensavers with words that might be misunderstood.
On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 16:51 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 21.00 skrev seth vidal:
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
What if I happen to be in the world's oldest profession?
You are not. Unless the physics dept. at duke is something else than i might believe.
I think you're generalizing overly much and making far too sweeping assumptions about mores and values.
-sv
I might. But who will miss it?
I will.
It is a reason Apple and even M$ don't ship screensavers with words that might be misunderstood.
I thought it was b/c they weren't nearly as interesting.
-sv
lør, 13.11.2004 kl. 17.56 skrev seth vidal:
On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 16:51 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 21.00 skrev seth vidal:
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
What if I happen to be in the world's oldest profession?
You are not. Unless the physics dept. at duke is something else than i might believe.
I think you're generalizing overly much and making far too sweeping assumptions about mores and values.
-sv
I might. But who will miss it?
I will.
you know how to use yum to get them :P
It is a reason Apple and even M$ don't ship screensavers with words that might be misunderstood.
I thought it was b/c they weren't nearly as interesting.
Do a nice screensaver need to contain anything that might get misjugded?
But can we *please* stop this war? It is getting mor stupid by each post. No-body is suggesting to remove everything funny (such as what should happen to anybody configuring gdm to run as root, according to the gdmsetup help file), but simply: -removing screensavers containing words which can be misjudged -splitting the screensaver rpm into a "fit for you grandma's computer"- and a "needs hw GL"- package - so that you could kill the last one easily.
lør, 13.11.2004 kl. 17.56 skrev seth vidal:
On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 16:51 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
fre, 12.11.2004 kl. 21.00 skrev seth vidal:
No but you might find that some words are found "unprofessional" for 95% of the userbase - even if they personally don't care.
nteresting.
Do a nice screensaver need to contain anything that might get misjugded?
But can we *please* stop this war?
I AGREE--------STOP!!!! BUT please split the screensavers into "good for grandma and MY kids" and something that I wouldn't mind laughing about once in a while. I have enough trouble keeping my 5 teenage boys away from trash sites on the internet without something poping up on the screen reminding them of their hormone driven interests. I am not a prude--I work electrical construction as a forman/leadman, I allow my foster kids and adopted kids to roam on the internet to a limited extent, but they do use LINUX to do this with--like Fedora Core 2. I have taken MS Windows off of their "internet" computer and hopefully will have taken some of the "risk" from my local network from their browsing. But I do keep a log of where they go and disconnect their cat5 cable if they go or do something outside the rules of conduct--but a questionable screensaver popping up just might put a question inside very "inquireing" minds they just have to get an answer to.....thanks steve
Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
I understand your point (and i have no problems with it *myself*), but if my manager came to me complaining about "hey! That new Linux-thingy, you installed, it popped up "penis" on my projector, while i was presenting our might-be new customers a new product!" and i never even had thought of the posibility - i would have been bloody damn embarassed and angry.
i haven't payed attention at install time and replaced with something, but what is the _default_ screen saver? if is a simple one, this is a non-issue. it may be a random one, and we can solve the "problem" just by making a good default.
if an user want to change a inoffensive screensaver into a offensive one, we can't really stop it: for example the user can select something like GLText and put whatever he want in there.
if an user want to change a inoffensive screensaver into a offensive one, we can't really stop it: for example the user can select something like GLText and put whatever he want in there.
Exept GL(Text) isn't really good for anything but machines with HW accellerated GL - which in many cases means properitary drivers...
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Aaron Bennett -
Bill Nottingham -
Colin Charles -
Douglas Furlong -
Jason Knight-Martin -
Kyrre Ness Sjobak -
Matthew Miller -
Nicu Buculei -
seth vidal -
Steve Thacker -
Tom Diehl -
Wally Wilson