Diseased Open Source Software Community - it's about ethics in Code of Conducts

[Creative Username]

Based off the message looking a bit ESL, I'm assuming the person who sent that it is Indian and takes issue with the banner being a delicious cow.

Ahh, that's it. I forgot pajeets worshipped cows instead of making them into tasty steaks like sane people. My bad.

 

[anustart76]

Based off the message looking a bit ESL, I'm assuming the person who sent that it is Indian and takes issue with the banner being a delicious cow.

But the guy with the steak pic is also Indian

 

[Maldavius Figtree]

But the guy with the steak pic is also Indian

Could be paki or Indian Muslim minority. They hate each other and are on the brink of total racial war every day.

The steak is not about veganism, it‘s basically an ethnic/religious attack, whose significance is lost on us westerners. I don’t find it too outrageous to ask him to not put up a deliberately racially inflammatory banner in a professional context.

 

[Panzerfrau]

This guy's website has a lot of posts about being a carnivore, all-meat recipes etc.
I think he loves talking about eating meat and did so in earnest in some project related chatroom, some vegie got triggered, they told him to shut up and out of spite he put steak on his banner.
I think that's the most likely explanation, if he was doing something "religiously offensive" they would just say so and they would have a stronger case.

ETA for context:
On being a carnivore (note he's using the same picture there as the "problematic" banner): srid.ca | archive
"Unwoke" article, that he linked in his NixOS forum bio: srid.ca | archive
Thread on X he made about the situation: X (archiving X threads is broken, rip)

In the "Unwoke", I like how trannies are at the top of the "Ideologies to watch out for", lol

 

[Rusty Metal Skull Gun]

Cow crossover!


Viciously murdered by Null himself is the story I heard

 

[xn--mck1c]

By the way, why the fuck is he being asked to remove the steak??? If I received a message like that I would reply in amused confusion, just to see why the fuck they asked this.

It's not like it's well done steak, now that would have been offensive.

 

[anustart76]

Could be paki or Indian Muslim minority. They hate each other and are on the brink of total racial war every day.

The steak is not about veganism, it‘s basically an ethnic/religious attack, whose significance is lost on us westerners. I don’t find it too outrageous to ask him to not put up a deliberately racially inflammatory banner in a professional context.

His name doesn't sound Muslim to me; a name ending in "kumar" is usually Hindu, I think. I actually do agree with you though, I just think the guy making the request is being a jackass about it.

 

[Average K-On Fan]

Cow crossover!
View attachment 5507600

Viciously murdered by Null himself is the story I heard

I am surprised that they didn't stop beating the dead horse already.

 

[Rusty Metal Skull Gun]

I am surprised that they didn't stop beating the dead horse already.

The funny thing is, Byuu wasn't transgender. He tried and failed to get a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. You have to be infected with the tucute brain worms to pretend he was a tranny.

 

[Panzerfrau]

I am surprised that they didn't stop beating the dead horse already.

It's not like they have any other tech tranny martyr they can feasibly cling to to seethe about the farms. Byuu was a long-awaited miracle for them and they will never shut up about him. He could turn up alive in well tomorrow and they would claim it's no big deal, he HAD to fake his own death to escape the chuds!

 

[Rusty Metal Skull Gun]

It's not like they have any other tech tranny martyr they can feasibly cling to seethe about the farms. Byuu was a long-awaited miracle for them and they will never shut up about him. He could turn up alive in well tomorrow and they would claim it's no big deal, he HAD to fake his own death to escape the chuds!

Yup. TDoR is such a barrel-scraping exercise. They're the safest minority by far, because they're nearly all white and middle-class.

No idea where the "neo-nazi" bit comes from. Maybe Null murdered him for the glory of the Reich, or something?

 

[WhiteNight]

The funny thing is, Byuu wasn't transgender. He tried and failed to get a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. You have to be infected with the tucute brain worms to pretend he was a tranny.

He identified as nonbinary, which is all that's needed these days. Demanding a diagnosis is transphobic.

In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if many of these MtF tech troons just changed their pronouns one day and never even talked to a doctor.

 

[Markass the Worst]

He identified as nonbinary, which is all that's needed these days. Demanding a diagnosis is transphobic.

He didn't even genuinely identify as one, he only did it to fit in. When he joined his own thread in 2020 (quite cordially, I might add):

So what's up with the furry / non-binary stuff? Like everything else above: I'm very impressionable, and I act like people around me to fit in. That's why you can see several versions of me depending on where you look. It gets me far in real life, and I have no problems staying employed.

 

[Markass the Worst]

View attachment 5503278
Remove the steak sir.

ETA for context:
On being a carnivore (note he's using the same picture there as the "problematic" banner): srid.ca | archive
"Unwoke" article, that he linked in his NixOS forum bio: srid.ca | archive

He's now joined the rationalist spinoff site TheMotte to post about this. Links to a new article (a) which includes a timeline of events, there's more to it than just the steak incident.


source (a)

Thread on X he made about the situation: X (archiving X threads is broken, rip)

Protip use ghostarchive for X threads.

 

[Panzerfrau]

So once again it started with le genduh... I want to shoot myself at this point.

Protip use ghostarchive for X threads.

Thanks! You're the sweetest archivist cookie, Markass

 

[The Real Slim Shady]

Cow crossover!
View attachment 5507600

Viciously murdered by Null himself is the story I heard

I dont think calling the trans community "neo-nazi scum" is very progressive.

 

[xn--mck1c]

Some drama from the TOR Project, there's more to this but I'll post the official response that kicked of the drama for now:

Spoiler: TL;DR on how TOR works

TOR works by picking a "circuit" of (usually) 3 "relays" to function as a chain of proxies to hide the sender / receiver. With each relay only knowing where they got the data from and where they have to send it to, chances are no one knows both the true sender and receiver. This of course, breaks if all the hops are controlled by the same entity. Relays are generally volunteer run, more relays = more bandwidth that the network can push around, more entities running relays = less chances of circuits having all relays being run by the same entity.

ATOR seems to be some crypto spec where instead of being rewarded for wasting electricity, the rewards go to those who contribute to the TOR network by running relays. Since the list of relays are public, any relay operator can add their crypto information to the relay description for others to look up to generate a consensus off.

Over the past few months, many relays started popping up with information in their descriptions related to ATOR, greatly increasing the bandwidth of the TOR network. However, the TOR Project decide to nuke those relays, effectively dropping the bandwidth of the network by ~20%, and published the following blogpost:

Safeguarding the Tor network: our commitment to network health and supporting relay operators (A)

---

Before digging into the technical details, the post already reads like some butthurt response:

Extremely vague reasons for the takedown
They quote "The problem with for-profit schemes" as a reason, and mention their policies against bad relays, but nothing in those policies relate to relays making a profit, mostly dealing with technical issues instead.

They further explain:

Recently, we've identified some operators associated with a high-risk, for-profit scheme. This financial scheme is promising monetary gains with cryptocurrency tokens, and is operated by third parties without the endorsement or approval of The Tor Project. We consider these relays to be harmful to the Tor network for a number of reasons, including that certain of the relays do not meet our requirements, and that such financial schemes present a significant threat to the network's integrity and the reputation of our project as they can attract individuals with malicious intent, put users at risk, or disrupt the volunteer-driven spirit that sustains the Tor Community.

As part of our assessment and due diligence into the matter, we engaged with relay operators and were often presented with scenarios in which relay operators associated with this scheme were putting themselves at risk by lacking the awareness of what project they were actually contributing to or operating relays in unsafe or high-risk regions. It has become clear to us that this scheme is not beneficial to the Tor network or the Tor Project. Which is why we proposed the rejection of those relays to our directory authorities who voted in favor of removing them.

This recommendation is further rooted in the fundamental principles of the Tor network: collaboration, the commitment to fight internet censorship and pervasive surveillance---and having the highest priority be to safeguard people's access to privacy and anonymity online. By removing relays associated with this for-profit scheme, the Tor network not only protects its users from potential harm but also reinforces its commitment to maintain a trusted and community-driven network. Upholding these principles is essential to ensure that Tor remains a safe and reliable tool for users seeking privacy and anonymity online.

This explanation doesn't really make sense either:

High-risk

Doesn't really explain how?

Individuals with malicious intent, put users at risk

Given that their threat model includes nation-state actors, a few malicious cryptobros shouldn't be able to do much to negatively impact the network or put users at risk.

disrupt the volunteer-driven spirit

what

operating relays in unsafe or high-risk regions.

This is an already existing problem, and should not affect the health of the network nor its users.

This recommendation is further rooted in the fundamental principles of the Tor network: collaboration, the commitment to fight internet censorship and pervasive surveillance---and having the highest priority be to safeguard people's access to privacy and anonymity online.

Did some PR team write this?

Protects its users from potential harm

What harm can these cryptobros do that nation states can't afford?

Mention of their past attempts to do something similar (TorCoin) that never came to fruition
They go on about their goals for that project, perhaps as an attempt to discredit ATOR by pointing out its shortcomings. Might also be a possible explanation to the perceived animosity; since it looks like they were beaten to the punch on a rather important feature: a working prototype.

No mention of ATOR at all
Especially from such a long blogpost, if ATOR and its specifications are so detrimental to the network, would it not be wise to alert the community to its existence, and learn their mode of operation to prevent such relays form entering the network in the future? Yet if the intent was to quash and hide their competition, it would make sense to not mention them.

 

[AnOminous]

Especially from such a long blogpost, if ATOR and its specifications are so detrimental to the network, would it not be wise to alert the community to its existence, and learn their mode of operation to prevent such relays form entering the network in the future? Yet if the intent was to quash and hide their competition, it would make sense to not mention them.

It sounds like a really good way to vastly increase the chances that all three relays are owned by the same entity.

 

[CockPockets]

Some drama from the TOR Project

It's really clear they want to label ATOR as untouchable and 'shut it down'. The part about "operating relays in unsafe or high-risk regions" just glows.
The entire point is to have as many nodes as possible. ATOR didn't seem to attach any other strings than crypto payments in return for operation. I think this is a great boon and motivator to operate nodes; do they not want that?
The great bulk of Tor nodes in Europe operate in 14-Eyes countries and data centers. The point about high risk regions is bunk, because you're already putting all your eggs in that basket.
What is bad about running nodes in less developed countries that probably don't have internet monitoring infrastructure, like deep packet inspection? Nothing lol. Absolutely nothing.
I think it would improve the security of the connection to have one end operated in US-allied states and the other in Russia/China's ones.

It reads like they do NOT want you to run your own Tor nodes. And that they especially do not want to have any sort of financial incentive for people to host for Tor, so you'd keep using the tons of nodes in Germany.
We know already the US operates Tor unmasking through compromised nodes, and that Germany is an intelligence partner of the US. You can put two and two together, and it fucking glows. It's a statement about who has control over the Tor network wrapped around in fancy PR-speak.

 

[306h4Ge5eJUJ]

It sounds like a really good way to vastly increase the chances that all three relays are owned by the same entity.

While true, the thing is that nothing really stops anybody from already doing this in a sneakier manner. If the foundation is worried about this, doesn't that basically mean they're not confident that the network is all that secure?

I could understand the angle that the subhumans who're in it to make quick cryptobucks probably aren't going to stand up reliable relays though.