Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mrighele's commentslogin

> There's a tricky ethical question here: if someone changed their name and ask for not being called their former name ever again, you can either ignore their will, which is rude, or chose to follow it but then you are doing a disservice to the public's understanding.

Calling somebody with his former name and mentioning his former name in a Wikipedia page are two completely different things. Using the fact that the former is seen as rude by some to avoid the second is in my opinion just an example of the level of extremism of the pro-trans activists.

But if in fact it made sense, shouldn't we completely remove any reference of the previous name also from the pages of people like Yusuf Islam [1] or Muhammad Ali [2] ?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Stevens

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali


Notability. Those two celebrities were known for a very long time under their old name. To prevent confusion, their old name is shown.

The victim of a crime was not notable before their name change.


Many married women are known under their husbands last names, from Maria Salomea Skłodowska, Betty Marion Ludden to Melanija Knavs. Some celebrities even use stage names, such as Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta.

Many of these women are not really known under those names, but somehow, they're still listed on their wiki pages.


Most of the married women on Wikipedia didn't get the choice of keeping their own name, so we cannot really compare it to someone who changed their name.

Same for stage names, people don't use stage name because they want to escape their former name, they use stage names because it's cool.

And when people use a pseudonym and want to keep their real identity secret for personal reasons, their name doesn't appear on Wikipedia, and nobody is ever complaining about that! It's as if people were obsessed by trans people in particular…


But it's not a secret, the name has been mentioned in mainsteam media on multiple occasions, and even here, in this thread on HN.

> It's as if people were obsessed by trans people in particular…

Yet, they keep every other name on wikipedia, especially if we're talking about peoples legal names, except if the person was trans for some reason. Wikipedia is the one making exceptions here for one group in particular.


> Yet, they keep every other name on wikipedia

Nope. When it's an unknown transgender person who died for being themselves, perhaps it's stupid to put the older name there. World renown Ellen Page is deadnamed right there at the top. Because they were known for decades worldwide under that name.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Page


Why stupid? I mean... what do we gain by removing that info? Isn't more info better?

Melanija Knavs was not known under that name, and it's still there.


> Isn't more info better?

No.

The goal of an encyclopedia is to have a high signal/noise ratio. If you put literally everything on a subject on its page there, it becomes fundamentally useless.

And in that particular case, the only people you satisfy by putting the info there, are the bullies who caused their suicide.


> But it's not a secret, the name has been mentioned in mainsteam media on multiple occasions, and even here, in this thread on HN.

Most pseudonyms aren't real secrets either, plenty of people knew the real name or face of people posting under a pseudonym but that doesn't make it OK to post it on Wikipedia.

> Yet, they keep every other name on wikipedia, especially if we're talking about peoples legal names

Ah yes, “every other” except for the ones they don't. We've already talked about people with pseudonyms right here!

> Wikipedia is the one making exceptions here for one group in particular.

One group that happened to be harassed (and, unfortunately often, assaulted) for having changed their name in the first place, hence the “exception”: the group is exceptionally vulnerable.


Notability is subjective

In the Universe, yes. In the closed system of Wikipedia, no, it's a well defined term with clearly established criteria, tested over the years on thousands of Talk pages on controversial pages, of how to achieve consensus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

> Calling somebody with his former name and mentioning his former name in a Wikipedia page are two completely different things

Except when people keep vandalizing Wikipedia renaming people there with their dead name. And yes it happens over and over and over again.

Because the most active extremists on the topic are by far the anti-trans crowd. (And it's not even close, there are trans people assaulted every week, sometimes going as far as murder this is extremism).

And again, Wikipedia keeps mentioning the former name when it's necessary (look for Bradley Manning on Wikipedia, the page redirects to Chelsea Manning but the old name is state because it's important).


According to MOS:GENDERID [1], a person's former name can be used when they were notable under that name. You're trying to make it out as if there's some nefarious double standard when there's not, editors just want Wikipedia to be clear and encyclopedic.

It's incredible that in a discussion about brutal violence against a child, the child victim is being painted as the "extremist"!

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biog...


People are downvoting factual comments like this then talk about “trans-activist extremism”…

Strong “Don't contradict my opinions with facts” vibe.


> level of extremism of the pro-trans activists

What on earth are you talking about?


Sometimes it easier to downvote that Earthian than to argue.

The use of the masculine pronoun here when we're referring to someone who transitioned from male kind of gives away that you're probably less concerned with searchability and preservation of history, and more concerned with promoting a transphobic agenda. I suppose it's possible you were using it as a generic pronoun, but in that case I would have expected "they." Am I wrong?

[flagged]


So, you don't think I'm wrong? The OP used "he" because they have a transphobic agenda?

> because we use to call a person who will always have hairs on his face as "male".

We may not have solved the question, "what is a woman," but you have brilliantly solved the question, "what is a man": a human with eyebrows.


If someone uses "he" word it does not means antitransism. My point is that trying to euphemize "he" word is anistraightism. And I am even not an antigayist.

If your words can be reversed so easily it means that you have no idea but a pure propaganda instead. Famous anti-white-straight-man-ism seems as a dangerous thing to me, so I oppose this unfamous Davos-protracted diversity woke ideology.


We're talking about the male pronoun used in the context of a discussion of a trans woman, not some kind of men's rights thing. Did you think I was arguing that saying "he" is bad because all men are evil or something? That's how faithless your interpretation of the arguments of non transphobic people has become?

Can you define "woke?"


I think you are saying that "he" because you support woke ideology. It is clearly visible since you were talking about trans values also.

If you need me to repeat - I will repeat: I am not antigayist and I am not anti-transist.

Woke is essentually anti-nationalism and anti-white-suppremacism.


> Woke is essentually anti-nationalism and anti-white-suppremacism.

Then, depending on your definition of nationalism, it sounds like it's an unimpeachably good thing to be Woke, so I'm super confused where you're coming from here.

To be clear: I was saying that the OP was purposefully misgendering Nex Benedict in order express their transphobia.


Wake up, please. Noone else except of white suprematist will support your protransism, think about it. Analyze what nations typically are against it and who will protect you in the special place where you have written that comment when the yellows will come. It is OK to be transgender, but only while you are protected. White suprematists may protect transgender values but they need a freedom to be free from that kind of euphemization you are spreading.

Italian here, and I never heard of the term either. Everybody always used the term floppy also for the 3.5 disks

I guess that since it was a foreign word the physical connotation of the term was simply lost, and "a floppy" was just the disk that your computer used.


Has anybody ever been able to program a VCR ?


Although the trope is hilarious I think most people just don't bother since it doesn't matter to them. I never had a problem setting the time on my VCR and using it to automatically record shows while I was at work.


I remember having trouble with mine, often mixing up the various hours (clock time, start time, end time, recording duration). Yes it was not rocket science, but it was used not enough to remember how to do it, and the manual was never ad hand when needed.


Yes it was no more difficult than setting any other digital clock. Even today, my microwave, kitchen radio, and several other devices all read "12:00" because I just don't bother to reset them every time there is a power glitch.


It seems strange now how often the power goes out. I remember back in the '90s I could leave my PlayStation running for two weeks because I didn't have a memory card to save my progress in Syphon Filter or NASCAR Thunder '98. Nowadays I have to set up autosave on everything and make checkpoint safeguards or scheduled backups because the power flickers off and back on at least once a week. This, with much more power efficient devices than that old PlayStation and Panasonic CRT.


This can vary greatly across locations, even within the same city and the same power distribution organization.

Different neighbors, being on different circuits, being on a line that's more likely to have storm damages, can make a lot of difference in quality of power delivery.

I've lived in places where the power practically never went out, never experienced undervolt situations, etc. I've then lived less than a mile away from the same place and experienced seemingly monthly issues of all the clocks being reset at random times when I come home. Living closer to things like hospitals, fire stations, emergency operations centers, etc. seem to give the best indication of power reliability, at least from my personal experiences.


It tends to happen in the area in general where I live. My house, neighbour's house, a house a mile away, all have the same trouble. I live within about six hundred yards of a volunteer fire department and about seven hundred yards from an elementary school, and even they've complained about how often the power goes out. The worst part is it's not like it's off for a few minutes and then it's back on. It's a momentary tenths of a second thing, like someone flicking a light switch down and up once to get people's attention.

Programming a VCR was pretty trivial for me as a kid, but a bit annoying.

But then VideoGuide [1] was released (available from RadioShack). I begged my parents for that and honestly it was the most amazing product and worked flawlessly. I felt like I was living in the future.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWzJuqkQbEQ


I was so happy when we got a VCR+ enabled VCR. Stupid simple to program. Just punch in a few digit code in the TV guide magazine and it would schedule it automatically.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_recorder_scheduling_code

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkXQqVMt6SE

The last couple of VCRs we owned even had automatic time setting. It read extra data in the vertical blanking interval from our local PBS station.


The last short lived generation of VCR we owned had an on screen menu/UI driven by the remote control for setting time and programming a scheduled recording rather than arcane and tedious sequences of button presses.

I was surprised that kind of thing wasn't much more common earlier - it wasn't really any new tech breakthroughs so much as someone just going to the effort of building it.


Sure, but uncle (who drove a truck for a job) sat down with the manual for several hours one night and figured it out. He was probably the only person in the entire town he lived in. Most people could have as well - but it would mean spending several hours of study and most people won't do that unless forced (and rarely even then - see all the tropes about homework...)


I mean that's exaggerating. I did it, it took maybe 10 minutes following the examples in the manual. It was not very intuitive though, so if it wasn't something you set up often you'd always have to go back and read the instructions again the next time.


I'm going from memory (i was a kid and he is dead so no wap to verify) but hours stands out. Remember he was a truck driver not someone used to reading technical documents. We also don't know which vcr's - yours might have been easier than his, or your program simpler).

who is right - no way to know, everyone can make their own judgement.


My grandmother figured it out enough to make sure her favorite soap was always taped. It was a "set it up once and mostly forget it" thing, with the real hard part forcing grandkids to stop using the TV during the hour it taped to avoid accidentally taping the wrong channel. (VCRs at the time had their own tuner for OTA and that shouldn't happen, but her stories were important enough to her she didn't want to risk it, and had risked it in a brief period of having a cable box passed through the VCR.)


In case of attack by the US, their troops would be effectively stranded in enemy territory, in particular their nukes.

I doubt that the US would invade Greenland without first pulling out of Europe (unless they do an all-out attack with also the troops in continental Europe, but that is something i doubt even Trump would do)


> People who are thinking of a Wayland replacement at this stage, mostly because they don't like it, will waste their time reinventing the mature parts instead of thinking about how to solve the remaining problems.

Now, if only people deciding to replace X11 with Wayland heeded your suggestion...


Lower GDP doesn't mean to lower standard of living, if it is due to lower population. Similarly, more foreigners doesn't mean better standard of living. There is no point in increasing the GDP if this doesn't translate.

Check the EU: millions of foreigner have arrived in the past 20 years, yet EU's GDP has been growing very little during the same time


> Complaining about DEI is a marker for a specific ideology.

Which ideology ? I find that DEI is a very ideological position specific to the America left (and to the America political situation). Not everybody wants to have to deal with it. Judging contributors just according to their contributions to the project (in general, not just code), is inherently anti-DEI because it would be about equality, not equity.


> specific to the America left (and to the America political situation)

It's not. It's not called explicitly DEI in other countries, but the ideas are in no way limited to the US.


Every regulation has a cost, even the good ones. The biggest cost is that they slow down the ability of people and companies to do business, which come out as a lower economic growth. Compared to its peers, EU's GDP has been growing very slowly for the past 20 years, I don't think it is a coincidence.

Some regulation is fine, but it should be really a fraction of what we currently have in Europe.

(Somewhat unrelated, but the EU's situation reminds me of "The End of Eternity" by Asimov, sans the time traveling)


>Compared to its peers, EU's GDP has been growing very slowly for the past 20 years, I don't think it is a coincidence.

Meamwhile, US's GDP exploded and the bust cycles are more or less screwing over 2 generations from such gains. GDP is completely divorced from how the people are doing these days.


Or manual install.


How about calling the other one "installing from the play store"? installing was there first.


Exactly. Let's invent a word for "installing from play store". Playstoring?

So we can rewrite the story to something like: Google wants to prohibit app installation on Android phones. The only way to get an app would be through playstoring.


how about "dogmatize" - I dogmatized this app from the play store.


Restricted installing


Corpoloading


Nannyloading


Same here. If this pass, I may start voting for Anti-EU parties, regardless for my disgust for them. This is too much of an important issue.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: