Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
115 messages Options
1 ... 3456
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Robert Carbone

We should be

too big

to take offense

and too noble

to give it·


          —Abraham Lincoln*


-Rob C.

* Feb 12 was his birthday




_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Fred Hebert-2
In reply to this post by Max Lapshin-2


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:58 AM, Max Lapshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
I think that this is very clear:

1) it is almost impossible to use a word that will not offence anyone  (especially in USA)


It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow, nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?

You can open up a dictionary and be sure that picking any random word is by far likely not to be racist. I'll just pick another animal instead of a raccoon: pick a red panda, for whom the raccoon is its closest genetic neighbor. I googled "red panda offensive" and it turns out to be links about how the animal defends itself so it's probably gonna be good for an English-speaking audience.

I do the same exercise for "coon offensive" and what do you know the top half of the page contains multiple links alluding to racism.

If folks from this mailing can't use google like that and it's considered "almost impossible" to figure out if a word like "coon" is racist, then we are truly a lost cause.


2) if you want to export something to some country/nation, you have to take in consideration local situation.  
For example russian Avtovaz had to change naming  from "Zhiguli" to "Lada" because nobody would purchase car named "Zhiguli" in France. Lada is pronounced better.

Agreed. The target audience is important. Buick made a car named "LaCrosse". They recently made a new version called "LaCrosse Avenir". "LaCrosse" alone is kind of fine, but in Quebec French, the sentence "LaCrosse Avenir" is pronounced the same as "La Crosse à venir", which in Joual means "the fraud to come". Not a great name for your car.

But you know what? People laughed about it and it was not racist, it was not insulting. It was just bad marketing. The company looks kind of stupid but everyone knows mistakes are made some time. All the injury is on their end for the bad advertisement. We have to stop making false equivalencies where people in this thread keep equating "it's hard to not accidentally have an unfortunate name in a foreign culture" with "it's hard not to pick a racist term in the main language I'm writing the library for."

They're not the same thing, we should not treat them the same. Parallels are easy to make, but they're not adequate.
 

3) If you do not want to change naming, you can lose some market.
Developers are the same market: they pay with attention, their time, etc.



So if Valery really wants his software to be used by Fred and his colleagues, he has to take it in consideration. 
If Valery is going to create such a wonderful software that Fred's colleagues will have to use even calling him a racist, so they will just use it or fork and rename.
If Valery is not going to change naming, then it seems that Fred's colleagues will refuse from software just because of naming. It is very professional, but this is life.


So I see only one question: are fred's colleagues a big market for Valery's software?  Perhaps they represent american market, which is still richest in the world and
one of best in terms of developer feedback.


So one thing I want to add here is that it's not just about me. It's not just about the people I know. It's not just about the people on this mailing list.

It's about all the people outside this community who see this debate and go "this is god damn ridiculous just change the fucking name, it's obviously racist to a bunch of folks" and make the decision to never join this community after seeing that. So yeah, Valery can keep the name and can keep going with it, but I want to say that in terms of adoption of Erlang, this one single thread will have done damage to the future of this language and its community, and probably well-deserved damage.

What frustrates me here is that I will have personally spent years of my own time trying to make Erlang friendlier and more approachable. Years. For free, without advertisement, without accepting donations. Because I think it's the right thing. Because I care to have a functional community that is fun and welcoming. I am personally frustrated and disappointed because it appears that one single day of shitty mailing list behavior has managed to provoke a massive backlash outside of here that undoes a lot of the work I've tried to do for a long time. Maybe some of you never wanted those folks to join here and you're fine with it. Maybe you just don't mind overall. That's your prerogative.

This is my frustration and it's on me for having spent a lot of time in here the way I did, but I wanted to voice it. I'm really disappointed at all of this.
 

Frankly speaking, it seems that it is a good idea to listen to Fred and listen to him. Just because it is so today in USA.



I'm happy if the marketing aspects is what ends up working for some people in here, but overall I think it's just the decent thing to do. To quote Vonnegut because I think he put it more succinctly than I ever will (I'm bad at keeping things short):

"God damn it, you've got to be kind.”



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Jesper Louis Andersen-2
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow, nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?


This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it gets caught in such a fistfight.



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Joshua Barney
I would like to suggest, and hear me out, the alternative name: ?trash panda?

* modern (2014 reddit comment)
* hiLARious name for a raccoon
* guaranteed to attract people at conferences
* a quick google brought up nothing offensive
** just a large community who adores these creatures

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:49 AM Jesper Louis Andersen <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow, nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?


This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it gets caught in such a fistfight.


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Krzysztof Jurewicz
In reply to this post by Joe Armstrong-2
Nowadays a typical specification of an external dependency (if we don’t want to rely on an external package index) looks like this:

dep_bar = git https://github.com/foo/bar.git v1.2.3

The problem with this solution is that it is completely mutable:

⒈ GitHub can decide to replace this repository with a malicious version (unlikely, but what if it was not GitHub, but a smaller, less trusted repository hosting?).
⒉ GitHub can be cracked.
⒊ Package mantainer can replace the repository with a malicious version.
⒋ Package maintainer’s account can be cracked.

To deal with it, one can use checksums instead of tag names (this is what lock files may do). However what if we want to update package bar from v1.2.3 to, let’s say, v1.3.0, and that we don’t want to check by hand that the checksum currently pointed by v1.3.0 is ok, but instead decide to trust package mantainers?

We can check that the Git tag is signed by a maintainer that we trust. This may work in many cases, but there are issues:

ⓐ If we want to upgrade to an old tag for which the signing key has already expired, then how do we know that the signature has not been generated after the expiration? We would need to associate trustable timestamps with PGP signatures to know that this has not occured. For example, a SHA-256 of a signature could be put in a Merkle tree for which the root hash has been put into Bitcoin blockchain. Git doesn’t support this out of the box, but it seems that an external implementation has already been started: https://github.com/opentimestamps/opentimestamps-client/blob/892e8378c4604a367654e49cac1220822d169e86/doc/git-integration.md [1].
ⓑ If we don’t want every trusted maintainer to be a single point of failure, then we may want to say that a new tag for package bar may be trusted if it is signed by at least m of n maintainers. But Git doesn’t seem to allow multiple signatures of one commit/tag.
ⓒ What if we don’t trust package maintainer at all, but we do trust some external reviewer that has checked that Git commit 0beec7b5ea3f0fdbc95d0dd47f3c5bc275da8a33 is safe/valid? He may sign the commit, but without putting the signature in the main repository. Therefore maybe commit/tag/any file signatures should be (optionally) decoupled from repositories?

To summarize:

Ⅰ To secure particular versions, we need checksums.
Ⅱ To secure package version naming, we need digital signatures with timestamping.

While package managers support Ⅰ, they seem to lack support for Ⅱ.

Not verifying downloaded code seems to be generally common in installation instructions on the Internet, but to stay within the area of Erlang package managers:

Though Loic does sign his commits, the recommended installation method for erlang.mk doesn’t seem to involve any GPG checking (the same applies to updates). There is even a relevant issue: https://github.com/ninenines/erlang.mk/issues/614

The recommended installation method for Rebar is downloading some binary from Amazon AWS without any verification. Tags are signed though.

The recommended installation method for the incriminately-named package manager is either using PyPi (don’t know whether packages are signed since it looks like it has been deleted from PyPi) or running make install (which involves sudo) after cloning the — unsigned — master branch.

Krzysiek

[1] See also the paper about Keyless Signatues’ Infrastructure for a description of a similar service, but not involving neither Git nor Bitcoin: https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/834.pdf
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

dieswaytoofast
In reply to this post by Jesper Louis Andersen-2
Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very* straightforward. Here are two excellent example

It really is not terribly different from software development
1) Identify the requirements for the name
   - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
   - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
   - What is your target market?
   - What are your evaluation criteria?
   - etc.
2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
3) Test these names thoroughly
   - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
   - Will it get misinterpreted? 
   - Is it confusing?
   - etc.
4) Deploy to production
   - Update docs
   - Send out emails
   - etc.

In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming / Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the tech-world, Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and just making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully hard. 

The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect - and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing & Sales (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a sarcastic tone to it, didn't you?).
Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling? The stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels don't fill themselves. 

Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I described above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white supremacist group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this is usually an actionable offense. 
To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.  And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes, that was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.

Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But hey, the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most anything that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays, not so much. 
Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for brand management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we should, at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act appropriately.

Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're trying to get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap doesn't always win out.  The problem is that 
   - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the goodwill that you've built
   - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help - you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that doesn't have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that the headwinds don't matter?
   - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the product's name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the markets that you are targeting....

Cheers

-- 
That tall bald Indian guy..
Twitter | 
Blog 
 


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow, nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?


This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it gets caught in such a fistfight.



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions




--
That tall bald Indian guy..
Twitter | 
Blog 
 

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Karlo Kuna
it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  acts as offensive in general.
what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that number of acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows in time, and 
they *do not* die out. given multinational context it seems to be the truth even more so. 
not dying out is the biggest problem. it is easy to make something offensive but is is very hard to emancipate the same thing  back to benign and 
in most cases original meaning. 

moral dilemma is should we police others or should we first police our own reactions? should i be offended regardless of context or should others make 
sure that i don't have to consider context? 

should one use coon or be offended by it? with context "raccoon"
should one use cowboy of be offended by it? with context "genocide"  

here i must stress out that in case of cowboy intended context was actually bound to tech world and i don't in any shape or form believe that author 
was implying otherwise. but as cruel as it sounds context *is* derived from historical fact packaged in perception of entertainment in less developed times
(cartoons and etc.).

this leads me following problems:
1) how do we emancipate back words, and acts in general
2) how much time should one spend in analyzing words and acts to deem them acceptable 

for one i think this thread is great because it gives author and community time for consideration and action before product is widely spread 

we should be kind, but also we need to be more resilient! 

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:06 AM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya <[hidden email]> wrote:
Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very* straightforward. Here are two excellent example

It really is not terribly different from software development
1) Identify the requirements for the name
   - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
   - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
   - What is your target market?
   - What are your evaluation criteria?
   - etc.
2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
3) Test these names thoroughly
   - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
   - Will it get misinterpreted? 
   - Is it confusing?
   - etc.
4) Deploy to production
   - Update docs
   - Send out emails
   - etc.

In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming / Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the tech-world, Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and just making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully hard. 

The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect - and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing & Sales (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a sarcastic tone to it, didn't you?).
Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling? The stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels don't fill themselves. 

Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I described above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white supremacist group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this is usually an actionable offense. 
To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.  And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes, that was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.

Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But hey, the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most anything that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays, not so much. 
Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for brand management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we should, at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act appropriately.

Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're trying to get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap doesn't always win out.  The problem is that 
   - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the goodwill that you've built
   - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help - you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that doesn't have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that the headwinds don't matter?
   - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the product's name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the markets that you are targeting....

Cheers

-- 
That tall bald Indian guy..
Twitter | 
Blog 
 


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow, nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?


This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it gets caught in such a fistfight.



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions




--
That tall bald Indian guy..
Twitter | 
Blog 
 

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions



_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Laura M. Castro Souto
I want to take a moment to thank Fred and many others for devoting their time and energy to constructively participate in this thread, which I think is very relevant when it comes to the kind of community we want to have.

it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  acts as offensive in general.
what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that number of acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows in time, and 
they *do not* die out.

Just wanted to say that perhaps they do not die out because the reasons they're originated do not die out either. If a word or expression is racist/sexist/offensive to an unprivileged group, how can we expect it to cease being so if there's still plenty of racism/sexism/etc. around us?

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Joe Armstrong-2
In reply to this post by Karlo Kuna
It seems like several arguments have gotten mixed into each other.

1) is how to choose a name that does not offend people.

A quick Google search said that that the Oxford English dictionary
lists 171 K words - how many of these are offensive - I have no idea - but
if you Google "<word>" + offensive and get zero hits it's probably OK.

A normal person has a working vocabulary of about 10K words (this is somebody
with a rather good knowledge of English) - assume ALL of these are offensive
(they are not but never mind) - that leave c. 160K words that are probably OK

Take two words and string them together (for example, "green-coffee")
probably OK since there are 160K^2 combinations you cannot argue that
it is difficult to make up new words. ("Red hat" did this and the name
seemed to have worked - I don't think it offended anybody, it has a
nice logo, and is memorable).

2) Does the individual have the right to use any old word they feel like
even though it might offend someone?

The answer is -  yes but ... it depends...

In some countries blasphemy is punishable by death.
In some countries being nasty about the rulers is a crime.

If you offend people it will have consequences - you might not know
that you have offended people but it will have consequences - once you
become aware of the consequences you will have to decide what to do
about it.

   - You can change the name
   - You can do nothing
   - You can stick to the original name

You will not know in advance the consequences of making one of the
three choices, but you might make an intelligent guess or ask people
for guidance if it is a foreign culture.

Personally I would be appalled if a program I wrote was being discussed
because the name of the program was the main reason to discuss the
program and not the merits or deficiencies of the program. I would
immediately change the name - but that's me.

personally I think we should celebrate the fact that there are
14,609 repositories on Git hub.

The fact that one of them has attracted a lot of publicity should not
detract from either the community or the other 14,608 repositories.

3) Is the language going to be diminished if we stop using certain words

No of course not - people are inventing new words all the time - words going
in and out of fashion has always happened.

I'd rather be known as the inventor of a splendid new word than as a
defender of the right of people to use old words whose 'best use
before date' has expired.

If you hear a public figure using a controversial word that causes a
storm of protest (this happens now and then, you can possibly think of
an example of this) my immediate thought is "What don't they want us
to be talking about."

Words elicit reactions - so it's good idea to know what they mean:

   'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
   'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

   'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so
    many different things.'

    - "Through the Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll

Cheers

/Joe


On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Karlo Kuna <[hidden email]> wrote:

> it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  acts as
> offensive in general.
> what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that number of
> acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows in
> time, and
> they *do not* die out. given multinational context it seems to be the truth
> even more so.
> not dying out is the biggest problem. it is easy to make something offensive
> but is is very hard to emancipate the same thing  back to benign and
> in most cases original meaning.
>
> moral dilemma is should we police others or should we first police our own
> reactions? should i be offended regardless of context or should others make
> sure that i don't have to consider context?
>
> should one use coon or be offended by it? with context "raccoon"
> should one use cowboy of be offended by it? with context "genocide"
>
> here i must stress out that in case of cowboy intended context was actually
> bound to tech world and i don't in any shape or form believe that author
> was implying otherwise. but as cruel as it sounds context *is* derived from
> historical fact packaged in perception of entertainment in less developed
> times
> (cartoons and etc.).
>
> this leads me following problems:
> 1) how do we emancipate back words, and acts in general
> 2) how much time should one spend in analyzing words and acts to deem them
> acceptable
>
> for one i think this thread is great because it gives author and community
> time for consideration and action before product is widely spread
>
> we should be kind, but also we need to be more resilient!
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:06 AM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can
>> take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very*
>> straightforward. Here are two excellent example
>>    -
>> https://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2017/10/26/before-naming-your-startup-read-this/
>>    - https://landor.com/thinking/how-not-to-name
>>
>> It really is not terribly different from software development
>> 1) Identify the requirements for the name
>>    - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
>>    - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
>>    - What is your target market?
>>    - What are your evaluation criteria?
>>    - etc.
>> 2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
>> 3) Test these names thoroughly
>>    - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
>>    - Will it get misinterpreted?
>>    - Is it confusing?
>>    - etc.
>> 4) Deploy to production
>>    - Update docs
>>    - Send out emails
>>    - etc.
>>
>> In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming /
>> Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the tech-world,
>> Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and just
>> making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully hard.
>>
>> The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect -
>> and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing & Sales
>> (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a sarcastic
>> tone to it, didn't you?).
>> Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling? The
>> stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
>> And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels don't
>> fill themselves.
>>
>> Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I described
>> above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be
>> making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white supremacist
>> group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are
>> table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this is
>> usually an actionable offense.
>> To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.
>> And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes, that
>> was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were
>> overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand
>> Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.
>>
>> Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But hey,
>> the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most anything
>> that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays, not so
>> much.
>> Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for brand
>> management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we should,
>> at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act appropriately.
>>
>> Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of
>> course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're trying to
>> get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap
>> doesn't always win out.  The problem is that
>>    - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the
>> goodwill that you've built
>>    - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to
>> educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help -
>> you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that doesn't
>> have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that the
>> headwinds don't matter?
>>    - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the product's
>> name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the markets
>> that you are targeting....
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> --
>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>> Twitter |
>> Blog |
>> G+
>>  |
>> LinkedIn
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of
>>>> writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more
>>>> load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow,
>>>> nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link
>>>> Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search
>>> as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is
>>> perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing
>>> behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it
>>> gets caught in such a fistfight.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>> Twitter |
>> Blog |
>> G+
>>  |
>> LinkedIn
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Joe Armstrong-2
Just another thought...

There seems to be the idea that in some sense people's freedom is being
limited because various ways of behaving in the past are no longer acceptable.

The Internet has changed how we interact, and we are performing a huge
experiment on billions of people, without knowing what will happen.

When I was a kid - there was no Internet and no computers - if we were bored
we'd go into the garden and paint some stones or eat a few worms or something.

The only people we interacted with, apart from adults, were the local kids
and the kids at school. All interaction was verbal and face-to-face.

If you offended somebody there was immediate feedback, they might cry
(if they were smaller than you) or thump you (if they were bigger) -
the point being was
that there was immediate feedback and you knew if you'd annoyed somebody.

Fast forward 60 odd years and now we communicate with an unknown number of
people who are brought up in different continents and in different cultures.

So of course, we have zero idea of how what we write is received, and
feedback is
slow or non-existent.

We have replaced high band-width one-to-one face-on communication with a small
number of people with low band-width one-to-many communication with a
large number
of people.

I have seen large numbers of e-mail conflicts in mailing groups that I
believe just
would not have happened in a face-to-face context. This is a consequence of
restricting the band-width and locality of our communication.

I don't believe that people are any better or any worse than they were
50 years ago before
the Internet, nor that things are getting worse. The ability to
communicate directly
with people from different cultures is great, we need to do this to
solve our common problems.

Writing accurately and saying exactly what you mean to a mixed
audience is incredibly
hard, talking face-to-face is far easier because of the immediate feedback.

The immediacy of instant messaging and email is also changing our communication
in ways we do not yet understand.

When I sent letters to people before the Internet I did not expect an
immediate reply.
When I replied to a letter I could reflect over the text for a few
weeks, many ill-considered letters
got ripped up the day after and not sent - why waste a good stamp and
walk to the post office?

I don't think we've figured out how to use the Internet in a sensible
way yet - we're in
what historians in the future will cause "the age of Internet confusion"

These little skirmishes over the meanings of words should not be taken
too seriously
but more as a symptom that the tools we use to communicate are crap
and we need to
invent better tools.

It will be interesting to see how these things evolve - Personally I
have turned off
all notifications on my phone and computer - I check mail/messages
now-and-then when I decide
not when my computer decides.

This is why I missed a telephone conference the day before yesterday -
I forgot - yes forgot -
that old fashioned thing that means that I am in control and not my computer.

Have a nice day

/Joe









On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Joe Armstrong <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It seems like several arguments have gotten mixed into each other.
>
> 1) is how to choose a name that does not offend people.
>
> A quick Google search said that that the Oxford English dictionary
> lists 171 K words - how many of these are offensive - I have no idea - but
> if you Google "<word>" + offensive and get zero hits it's probably OK.
>
> A normal person has a working vocabulary of about 10K words (this is somebody
> with a rather good knowledge of English) - assume ALL of these are offensive
> (they are not but never mind) - that leave c. 160K words that are probably OK
>
> Take two words and string them together (for example, "green-coffee")
> probably OK since there are 160K^2 combinations you cannot argue that
> it is difficult to make up new words. ("Red hat" did this and the name
> seemed to have worked - I don't think it offended anybody, it has a
> nice logo, and is memorable).
>
> 2) Does the individual have the right to use any old word they feel like
> even though it might offend someone?
>
> The answer is -  yes but ... it depends...
>
> In some countries blasphemy is punishable by death.
> In some countries being nasty about the rulers is a crime.
>
> If you offend people it will have consequences - you might not know
> that you have offended people but it will have consequences - once you
> become aware of the consequences you will have to decide what to do
> about it.
>
>    - You can change the name
>    - You can do nothing
>    - You can stick to the original name
>
> You will not know in advance the consequences of making one of the
> three choices, but you might make an intelligent guess or ask people
> for guidance if it is a foreign culture.
>
> Personally I would be appalled if a program I wrote was being discussed
> because the name of the program was the main reason to discuss the
> program and not the merits or deficiencies of the program. I would
> immediately change the name - but that's me.
>
> personally I think we should celebrate the fact that there are
> 14,609 repositories on Git hub.
>
> The fact that one of them has attracted a lot of publicity should not
> detract from either the community or the other 14,608 repositories.
>
> 3) Is the language going to be diminished if we stop using certain words
>
> No of course not - people are inventing new words all the time - words going
> in and out of fashion has always happened.
>
> I'd rather be known as the inventor of a splendid new word than as a
> defender of the right of people to use old words whose 'best use
> before date' has expired.
>
> If you hear a public figure using a controversial word that causes a
> storm of protest (this happens now and then, you can possibly think of
> an example of this) my immediate thought is "What don't they want us
> to be talking about."
>
> Words elicit reactions - so it's good idea to know what they mean:
>
>    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
>    'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
>
>    'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so
>     many different things.'
>
>     - "Through the Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll
>
> Cheers
>
> /Joe
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Karlo Kuna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  acts as
>> offensive in general.
>> what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that number of
>> acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows in
>> time, and
>> they *do not* die out. given multinational context it seems to be the truth
>> even more so.
>> not dying out is the biggest problem. it is easy to make something offensive
>> but is is very hard to emancipate the same thing  back to benign and
>> in most cases original meaning.
>>
>> moral dilemma is should we police others or should we first police our own
>> reactions? should i be offended regardless of context or should others make
>> sure that i don't have to consider context?
>>
>> should one use coon or be offended by it? with context "raccoon"
>> should one use cowboy of be offended by it? with context "genocide"
>>
>> here i must stress out that in case of cowboy intended context was actually
>> bound to tech world and i don't in any shape or form believe that author
>> was implying otherwise. but as cruel as it sounds context *is* derived from
>> historical fact packaged in perception of entertainment in less developed
>> times
>> (cartoons and etc.).
>>
>> this leads me following problems:
>> 1) how do we emancipate back words, and acts in general
>> 2) how much time should one spend in analyzing words and acts to deem them
>> acceptable
>>
>> for one i think this thread is great because it gives author and community
>> time for consideration and action before product is widely spread
>>
>> we should be kind, but also we need to be more resilient!
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:06 AM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can
>>> take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very*
>>> straightforward. Here are two excellent example
>>>    -
>>> https://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2017/10/26/before-naming-your-startup-read-this/
>>>    - https://landor.com/thinking/how-not-to-name
>>>
>>> It really is not terribly different from software development
>>> 1) Identify the requirements for the name
>>>    - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
>>>    - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
>>>    - What is your target market?
>>>    - What are your evaluation criteria?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
>>> 3) Test these names thoroughly
>>>    - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
>>>    - Will it get misinterpreted?
>>>    - Is it confusing?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 4) Deploy to production
>>>    - Update docs
>>>    - Send out emails
>>>    - etc.
>>>
>>> In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming /
>>> Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the tech-world,
>>> Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and just
>>> making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully hard.
>>>
>>> The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect -
>>> and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing & Sales
>>> (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a sarcastic
>>> tone to it, didn't you?).
>>> Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling? The
>>> stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
>>> And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels don't
>>> fill themselves.
>>>
>>> Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I described
>>> above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be
>>> making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white supremacist
>>> group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are
>>> table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this is
>>> usually an actionable offense.
>>> To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.
>>> And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes, that
>>> was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were
>>> overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand
>>> Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But hey,
>>> the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most anything
>>> that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays, not so
>>> much.
>>> Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for brand
>>> management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we should,
>>> at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act appropriately.
>>>
>>> Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of
>>> course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're trying to
>>> get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap
>>> doesn't always win out.  The problem is that
>>>    - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the
>>> goodwill that you've built
>>>    - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to
>>> educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help -
>>> you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that doesn't
>>> have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that the
>>> headwinds don't matter?
>>>    - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the product's
>>> name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the markets
>>> that you are targeting....
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of
>>>>> writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more
>>>>> load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow,
>>>>> nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link
>>>>> Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search
>>>> as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is
>>>> perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing
>>>> behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it
>>>> gets caught in such a fistfight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Antonio SJ Musumeci
"These little skirmishes over the meanings of words should not be taken too seriously but more as a symptom that the tools we use to communicate are crap and we need to invent better tools."

While I entirely agree that communication via computer is seriously lacking relative to other forms that is not what the issue was here. This was an emotional, ideological, and political skirmish. The semantic argument was the catalyst. Unfortunately no form of communication has yet made the former noticeably better or easier.

Some individuals made exaggerated / invalid / incomplete claims on the meaning of a word. Others tried to correct them. This should be an dispassionate and simple problem to solve. The historical and current meanings and uses are easily found and should not be up for debate. Anecdotal evidence can be useful to provide nuance. Severity, optics, etc. can debated but those arguments were mixed in with unfounded statements and accusations on "both sides." Those were clearly coming from the ideological backgrounds and experiences of those posting them. Would they have responded differently in person? Understood one another better? Maybe. In my experience, in today's political atmosphere in the USA, I've seen people fly off the handle for completely innocent things. Individual's  career paths ruined and friendships ended because someone assumed X about person Y and no effort was put into at least agreeing on what was said, done, or believed. Calling someone a racist, directly or indirectly; purposefully or not, because they think the use of a word is more nuanced then other's believe or that defending one's right to use such a word means they have a desire to have racist words used is has nothing to do with communication channel inefficiencies. Just as accusing people of being SJWs or overly sensitive isn't. Those are personal attacks & ad hominems which should have no place here (and even if true has nothing to do with the core topic). If people generally agree on the "marketing" comments made... for all those attacking one another... it's "bad marketing" of your ideas to attack individuals and make unsubstantiated claims regarding their beliefs or intents. Most respond rather poorly to such things and even if you're on the "right side" your language and behavior will likely turnoff those who don't already hold a strong position. This is "debate 101" kind of stuff.

Unrelated to the above but perhaps interesting to those who were following this thread... regarding the paradox of tolerance. It could have been the inefficiencies of the communication medium but it appeared that it may not have been fully quoted and understood.

Popper's statement, when read in full, is a comment on when one must be "intolerant" in order to save a tolerant system. It would fit the classical liberal position of free speech absolution if 'tolerance' is understood in that sense but he's a bit more vague. As with his "paradox of freedom" he is using extremely generous / non-specific interpretations of "freedom" and "tolerance." In a way that IMO only an extreme pacifist would use. Which is useful in the sense that he wasn't adding hidden meaning to these words but at the same time is contrary to how many think of them. This extremely literal usage is not the classical liberal interpretations of those words.This semantic distinction might seem pedantic but is useful in understanding what is being said.

* tolerance: the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.

* tolerate: allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of without interference

To disagree, debate, or argue against something is not to be intolerant. That's not "interference." Interference, in the classical liberal sense, would refer to legal or extralegal, non-voluntary intervention. One could use it to mean private intervention. Kicking someone off a mailinglist for doing or saying something the moderators disagree with would technically be "intolerant" but in the philosophical sense that's not what is meant. At least not within the confines of the classical liberal rule set. While Popper is using a definition without classical liberal qualifiers he was a social liberal (which has roots in classical liberalism) and given the statement's reference to "fists or pistols" and suggesting it'd be "unwise" to suppress intolerant philosophies so long as they can continue to be argued against and kept "in check by public opinion" there is good evidence to believe this is more or less a rewording of previous free speech absolutist positions. Also it should be noted that the statement comes from a footnote. The consideration to be intolerant was made out-of-band from his main point and seemed to have been made with hesitation.

I bring this up to hopefully provide insight and clarity but also to point out that for those of us in the USA the position on free speech absolution, while diminished relative to times past, is still strongly held and ingrained in our law. Many will want to err on the side of tolerance and open dialog. For those within and without the US it'd be good to remember that the USA is unique in the world in this regard and has been hotly debated for hundreds of years. When arguing in and around this topic this should be kept in mind. We have different definitions for some of these words which are easy to take for granted and overlook. Another thing to keep in mind is that smarter people than all of us have probably debated all this before and while fun to do it ourselves it might be better to go off and read those who did so already. It could save a lot of keyboard strokes and limit the number of aggravated individuals. In the least such topics be held in more appropriate forums? Since we've almost certainly drowned out the technical discussions... may I suggest starting a new thread?

+1 for "trash panda" w/ a shortened tool name "tp" :)


On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Joe Armstrong <[hidden email]> wrote:
Just another thought...

There seems to be the idea that in some sense people's freedom is being
limited because various ways of behaving in the past are no longer acceptable.

The Internet has changed how we interact, and we are performing a huge
experiment on billions of people, without knowing what will happen.

When I was a kid - there was no Internet and no computers - if we were bored
we'd go into the garden and paint some stones or eat a few worms or something.

The only people we interacted with, apart from adults, were the local kids
and the kids at school. All interaction was verbal and face-to-face.

If you offended somebody there was immediate feedback, they might cry
(if they were smaller than you) or thump you (if they were bigger) -
the point being was
that there was immediate feedback and you knew if you'd annoyed somebody.

Fast forward 60 odd years and now we communicate with an unknown number of
people who are brought up in different continents and in different cultures.

So of course, we have zero idea of how what we write is received, and
feedback is
slow or non-existent.

We have replaced high band-width one-to-one face-on communication with a small
number of people with low band-width one-to-many communication with a
large number
of people.

I have seen large numbers of e-mail conflicts in mailing groups that I
believe just
would not have happened in a face-to-face context. This is a consequence of
restricting the band-width and locality of our communication.

I don't believe that people are any better or any worse than they were
50 years ago before
the Internet, nor that things are getting worse. The ability to
communicate directly
with people from different cultures is great, we need to do this to
solve our common problems.

Writing accurately and saying exactly what you mean to a mixed
audience is incredibly
hard, talking face-to-face is far easier because of the immediate feedback.

The immediacy of instant messaging and email is also changing our communication
in ways we do not yet understand.

When I sent letters to people before the Internet I did not expect an
immediate reply.
When I replied to a letter I could reflect over the text for a few
weeks, many ill-considered letters
got ripped up the day after and not sent - why waste a good stamp and
walk to the post office?

I don't think we've figured out how to use the Internet in a sensible
way yet - we're in
what historians in the future will cause "the age of Internet confusion"

These little skirmishes over the meanings of words should not be taken
too seriously
but more as a symptom that the tools we use to communicate are crap
and we need to
invent better tools.

It will be interesting to see how these things evolve - Personally I
have turned off
all notifications on my phone and computer - I check mail/messages
now-and-then when I decide
not when my computer decides.

This is why I missed a telephone conference the day before yesterday -
I forgot - yes forgot -
that old fashioned thing that means that I am in control and not my computer.

Have a nice day

/Joe









On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Joe Armstrong <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It seems like several arguments have gotten mixed into each other.
>
> 1) is how to choose a name that does not offend people.
>
> A quick Google search said that that the Oxford English dictionary
> lists 171 K words - how many of these are offensive - I have no idea - but
> if you Google "<word>" + offensive and get zero hits it's probably OK.
>
> A normal person has a working vocabulary of about 10K words (this is somebody
> with a rather good knowledge of English) - assume ALL of these are offensive
> (they are not but never mind) - that leave c. 160K words that are probably OK
>
> Take two words and string them together (for example, "green-coffee")
> probably OK since there are 160K^2 combinations you cannot argue that
> it is difficult to make up new words. ("Red hat" did this and the name
> seemed to have worked - I don't think it offended anybody, it has a
> nice logo, and is memorable).
>
> 2) Does the individual have the right to use any old word they feel like
> even though it might offend someone?
>
> The answer is -  yes but ... it depends...
>
> In some countries blasphemy is punishable by death.
> In some countries being nasty about the rulers is a crime.
>
> If you offend people it will have consequences - you might not know
> that you have offended people but it will have consequences - once you
> become aware of the consequences you will have to decide what to do
> about it.
>
>    - You can change the name
>    - You can do nothing
>    - You can stick to the original name
>
> You will not know in advance the consequences of making one of the
> three choices, but you might make an intelligent guess or ask people
> for guidance if it is a foreign culture.
>
> Personally I would be appalled if a program I wrote was being discussed
> because the name of the program was the main reason to discuss the
> program and not the merits or deficiencies of the program. I would
> immediately change the name - but that's me.
>
> personally I think we should celebrate the fact that there are
> 14,609 repositories on Git hub.
>
> The fact that one of them has attracted a lot of publicity should not
> detract from either the community or the other 14,608 repositories.
>
> 3) Is the language going to be diminished if we stop using certain words
>
> No of course not - people are inventing new words all the time - words going
> in and out of fashion has always happened.
>
> I'd rather be known as the inventor of a splendid new word than as a
> defender of the right of people to use old words whose 'best use
> before date' has expired.
>
> If you hear a public figure using a controversial word that causes a
> storm of protest (this happens now and then, you can possibly think of
> an example of this) my immediate thought is "What don't they want us
> to be talking about."
>
> Words elicit reactions - so it's good idea to know what they mean:
>
>    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
>    'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
>
>    'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so
>     many different things.'
>
>     - "Through the Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll
>
> Cheers
>
> /Joe
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Karlo Kuna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  acts as
>> offensive in general.
>> what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that number of
>> acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows in
>> time, and
>> they *do not* die out. given multinational context it seems to be the truth
>> even more so.
>> not dying out is the biggest problem. it is easy to make something offensive
>> but is is very hard to emancipate the same thing  back to benign and
>> in most cases original meaning.
>>
>> moral dilemma is should we police others or should we first police our own
>> reactions? should i be offended regardless of context or should others make
>> sure that i don't have to consider context?
>>
>> should one use coon or be offended by it? with context "raccoon"
>> should one use cowboy of be offended by it? with context "genocide"
>>
>> here i must stress out that in case of cowboy intended context was actually
>> bound to tech world and i don't in any shape or form believe that author
>> was implying otherwise. but as cruel as it sounds context *is* derived from
>> historical fact packaged in perception of entertainment in less developed
>> times
>> (cartoons and etc.).
>>
>> this leads me following problems:
>> 1) how do we emancipate back words, and acts in general
>> 2) how much time should one spend in analyzing words and acts to deem them
>> acceptable
>>
>> for one i think this thread is great because it gives author and community
>> time for consideration and action before product is widely spread
>>
>> we should be kind, but also we need to be more resilient!
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:06 AM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can
>>> take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very*
>>> straightforward. Here are two excellent example
>>>    -
>>> https://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2017/10/26/before-naming-your-startup-read-this/
>>>    - https://landor.com/thinking/how-not-to-name
>>>
>>> It really is not terribly different from software development
>>> 1) Identify the requirements for the name
>>>    - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
>>>    - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
>>>    - What is your target market?
>>>    - What are your evaluation criteria?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
>>> 3) Test these names thoroughly
>>>    - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
>>>    - Will it get misinterpreted?
>>>    - Is it confusing?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 4) Deploy to production
>>>    - Update docs
>>>    - Send out emails
>>>    - etc.
>>>
>>> In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming /
>>> Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the tech-world,
>>> Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and just
>>> making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully hard.
>>>
>>> The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect -
>>> and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing & Sales
>>> (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a sarcastic
>>> tone to it, didn't you?).
>>> Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling? The
>>> stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
>>> And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels don't
>>> fill themselves.
>>>
>>> Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I described
>>> above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be
>>> making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white supremacist
>>> group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are
>>> table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this is
>>> usually an actionable offense.
>>> To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.
>>> And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes, that
>>> was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were
>>> overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand
>>> Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But hey,
>>> the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most anything
>>> that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays, not so
>>> much.
>>> Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for brand
>>> management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we should,
>>> at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act appropriately.
>>>
>>> Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of
>>> course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're trying to
>>> get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap
>>> doesn't always win out.  The problem is that
>>>    - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the
>>> goodwill that you've built
>>>    - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to
>>> educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help -
>>> you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that doesn't
>>> have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that the
>>> headwinds don't matter?
>>>    - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the product's
>>> name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the markets
>>> that you are targeting....
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of
>>>>> writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and handle more
>>>>> load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And somehow,
>>>>> nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use the link
>>>>> Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your search
>>>> as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is
>>>> perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words changing
>>>> behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand if it
>>>> gets caught in such a fistfight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Edmond Begumisa
In reply to this post by Roman Galeev
On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 02:27:42 +1100, Roman Galeev <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Also, is there someone on this list who is really offended by the repo  
> named coon?

Yes.

Well, not so much full-on outrage, more like a bit of a cringe [1]. More  
of a "Yeah, it was innocent but the author really ought to change that".

The word fa**ot also means a bundle of sticks. It's probably a bad idea to  
name a piece of software fa**ot even with a bundle of sticks as the icon.  
And if one were unaware of the problems the name fa**ot might cause an  
many parts of the world, it's probably best to rename the software after  
the inappropriateness has been pointed out. And that I think is the point  
-- the inappropriateness/baggage has been pointed out early [2].

That being said, my instinct would be to avoid this tool for a completely  
different reason [1] -- it's written in Python! I have some internal code  
I've been maintaining which builds a digraph of OTP application  
dependencies and manages dependency loading via .erlang files (no  
releases). I would have liked to contribute some of that, but I don't  
speak Python :(

- Edmond -

[1] I'm not from a part of the world that has really heavy historical  
baggage associated with that particular word (e.g. USA, Britain, South  
Africa). But it does still make me cringe. And I do know people from those  
parts of the world who'd wouldn't take the initial innocent usage badly,  
but would take exception to sticking with the name despite protests.

[2] Many years ago I decided to name my company Hysteria. Much later, I  
found out that women of a certain generation have a negative association  
with that word (it was heavily used in the past to refer to a sexist,  
fictitious mental disorder.) It was too late to change it. I don't know if  
we lost business because of it.


>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Roman Galeev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> denigrate protected groups
>>
>> I'm quite sure you can use any given word for that.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:22 PM, Loïc Hoguin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> That's the thing about identity politics, it's not all offensive words  
>>> that are bad, it's only >>>those that can be used to denigrate  
>>> protected groups (regardless of intent or how old or local >>>the  
>>> meaning is).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/12/2018 04:18 PM, Roman Galeev wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, we have git already and nobody seems to be offended.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Chris Waymire <[hidden email]  
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> >>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    The idea that a software library that happens to share name with a
>>>>
>>>>    racial slur that is over 180 years old and has not been part of
>>>>
>>>>    common social use for several decades would make people angry is
>>>>
>>>>    ridiculous. Especially when the word as meanings that pre-date the
>>>>
>>>>    slur. If that upsets you to the point where you are unable to get
>>>>
>>>>    past it then it is time to unplug your tv, your radio and your
>>>>
>>>>    internet and live a life of peaceful solitude.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 7:03 AM, Loïc Hoguin <[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>    <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        This idea that white supremacists need a reason to call others
>>>>
>>>>        using racial slurs is ridiculous at best. At this rate you will
>>>>
>>>>        call me a Nazi by the next reply. Fingers crossed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        Again Valery does not apply this term to black people or make
>>>>
>>>>        any reference about them or the US History, so there's no  
>>>> intent
>>>>
>>>>        here. He's using the other meaning.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        Soon you will argue that hunters are racists because they call
>>>>
>>>>        racoons "coons".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        On 02/12/2018 03:53 PM, Josh Barney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>            Intent IS important and the intent of the people who  
>>>> applied
>>>>
>>>>            this term to black people was a very bad intent.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>            ?People are getting offended much too easily these days? ?
>>>>
>>>>            this argument has been plastered all over American news for
>>>>
>>>>            years, always coming from a privileged group claiming hurt.
>>>>
>>>>            This is the white supremesist position.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>            On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:34 AM Lo?c Hoguin
>>>>
>>>>            <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 This reminds me of people who were calling some coffee
>>>>
>>>>            brand racist not
>>>>
>>>>                 realizing that the Spanish or Portuguese translation
>>>>
>>>>            for "black"
>>>>
>>>>                 looks a
>>>>
>>>>                 lot like a racist slur.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 People are getting offended much too easily these  
>>>> days.
>>>>
>>>>            Intent is
>>>>
>>>>                 important and there's no intent to slur here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 On 02/12/2018 03:15 PM, Josh Barney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                  > One would presume that all the black persons who
>>>>
>>>>            have been called
>>>>
>>>>                 in an
>>>>
>>>>                  > effort to reduce them to rabid animals hunted for
>>>>
>>>>            sport by white men
>>>>
>>>>                  > with dogs would be aware. That?s the import thing
>>>>
>>>>            about racial
>>>>
>>>>                 slurs,
>>>>
>>>>                  > not that you are unhurt, but that someone else is  
>>>> hurt.
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:04 AM Lo?c Hoguin
>>>>
>>>>            <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>
>>>>                 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > More importantly, who is aware of them? I doubt too
>>>>
>>>>            many people
>>>>
>>>>                 outside
>>>>
>>>>                  > of North America know about it.
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > And secondly, should you censor a word that's
>>>>
>>>>            otherwise perfectly
>>>>
>>>>                 fine
>>>>
>>>>                  > because of its use in slang? It'll get some radical
>>>>
>>>>            activists
>>>>
>>>>                 angry for
>>>>
>>>>                  > sure so it depends on whether you see this as a  
>>>> good
>>>>
>>>>            or a bad thing.
>>>>
>>>>                  > Nowadays that tends to be a good thing.
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > Most people will not think twice about it.
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > On 02/12/2018 02:17 PM, Fred Hebert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Are you aware of the connotations coming with  
>>>> that
>>>>
>>>>            name?
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Valery Tikhonov
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Hi,
>>>>
>>>>                  > > I would like to introduce ?oon
>>>>
>>>>                 <https://github.com/comtihon/coon
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/coon>> -
>>>>
>>>>                  > > build and dependency management system and tool
>>>>
>>>>            for easy
>>>>
>>>>                 deployment
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Erlang packages.
>>>>
>>>>                  > > In short:
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > * coon uses prebuilt packages from CoonHub
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <https://coon.justtech.blog>, what reduces build  
>>>> time
>>>>
>>>>                  > > * thanks to github integration it allows to
>>>>
>>>>            trigger new builds for
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Erlang packages when commiting new tag in repo
>>>>
>>>>                  > > * you can set installation steps to deploy and  
>>>> run
>>>>
>>>>            Erlang service
>>>>
>>>>                  > > from prebuilt package on system without  
>>>> otp/Erlang
>>>>
>>>>            installed
>>>>
>>>>                  > > with `coon install namespace/name`
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Documentation, articles and links:
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > coon (client) - https://github.com/comtihon/coon
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/coon>
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <https://github.com/comtihon/coon
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/coon>> see Readme.md and doc  
>>>> folder
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > coon_auto_builder (server) -
>>>>
>>>>                  > > https://github.com/comtihon/coon_auto_builder
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/coon_auto_builder>
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <https://github.com/comtihon/coon_auto_builder
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/coon_auto_builder>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > how to create and build Erlang service from  
>>>> scratch
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>            https://justtech.blog/2018/01/07/create-erlang-service-with-coon/
>>>>
>>>>            <https://justtech.blog/2018/01/07/create-erlang-service-with-coon/>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                            <https://justtech.blog/2018/01/07/create-erlang-service-with-coon/
>>>>
>>>>            <https://justtech.blog/2018/01/07/create-erlang-service-with-coon/>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > how to prepare Erlang service for deploy
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>            https://justtech.blog/2018/02/11/erlang-service-easy-deploy-with-coon/
>>>>
>>>>            <https://justtech.blog/2018/02/11/erlang-service-easy-deploy-with-coon/>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                            <https://justtech.blog/2018/02/11/erlang-service-easy-deploy-with->>>>coon/
>>>>
>>>>            <https://justtech.blog/2018/02/11/erlang-service-easy-deploy-with-coon/>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > example service which uses coon
>>>>
>>>>                  > > https://github.com/comtihon/example_service
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/example_service>
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <https://github.com/comtihon/example_service
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/example_service>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > example library which uses coon
>>>>
>>>>                  > > https://github.com/comtihon/mongodb-erlang
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/mongodb-erlang>
>>>>
>>>>                  > > <https://github.com/comtihon/mongodb-erlang
>>>>
>>>>            <https://github.com/comtihon/mongodb-erlang>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > Hope you find this tool useful :)
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>                  > > erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>
>>>>                  > > [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>            http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>            <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>            <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>            <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  > > _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>                  > > erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>
>>>>                  > > [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>            http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>            <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>>
>>>>                  > >
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>                  > --
>>>>
>>>>                  > Lo?c Hoguin
>>>>
>>>>                  > https://ninenines.eu
>>>>
>>>>                  > _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>                  > erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>
>>>>                  > [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>            <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>                  > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>            <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>>
>>>>                  >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 --     Lo?c Hoguin
>>>>
>>>>            https://ninenines.eu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        --         Loïc Hoguin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        https://ninenines.eu
>>>>
>>>>        _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>        erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>
>>>>        [hidden email]  
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>        http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>        <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>    erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>
>>>>    [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>    http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>>    <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> With best regards,
>>>>
>>>>      Roman Galeev,
>>>>
>>>>      +420 702 817 968
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Loïc Hoguin
>>>
>>> https://ninenines.eu
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --With best regards,
>>     Roman Galeev,
>>     +420 702 817 968
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --With best regards,
>     Roman Galeev,
>     +420 702 817 968
>
>



--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Edmond Begumisa
In reply to this post by Joe Armstrong-2
The question of the (in)appropriateness of this particular name has  
answered itself, me thinks.

My personal views on the name aside, pragmatically, the fact that the name  
has generated so much heat and very little discussion about the software  
itself pretty much answers the question of whether or not it's a good idea  
to rename it, regardless of the arguments for retaining the current name.

For the author, probably the worst thing to do would be to ignore people's  
very strong opinions against the name generated in just 24 hours. In the  
end, it's the author's call. But Valery should remember that life is  
short. Do you really what to deal with this for the rest of the tool's  
life?

- Edmond -

On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:05:51 +1100, Joe Armstrong <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It seems like several arguments have gotten mixed into each other.
>
> 1) is how to choose a name that does not offend people.
>
> A quick Google search said that that the Oxford English dictionary
> lists 171 K words - how many of these are offensive - I have no idea -  
> but
> if you Google "<word>" + offensive and get zero hits it's probably OK.
>
> A normal person has a working vocabulary of about 10K words (this is  
> somebody
> with a rather good knowledge of English) - assume ALL of these are  
> offensive
> (they are not but never mind) - that leave c. 160K words that are  
> probably OK
>
> Take two words and string them together (for example, "green-coffee")
> probably OK since there are 160K^2 combinations you cannot argue that
> it is difficult to make up new words. ("Red hat" did this and the name
> seemed to have worked - I don't think it offended anybody, it has a
> nice logo, and is memorable).
>
> 2) Does the individual have the right to use any old word they feel like
> even though it might offend someone?
>
> The answer is -  yes but ... it depends...
>
> In some countries blasphemy is punishable by death.
> In some countries being nasty about the rulers is a crime.
>
> If you offend people it will have consequences - you might not know
> that you have offended people but it will have consequences - once you
> become aware of the consequences you will have to decide what to do
> about it.
>
>    - You can change the name
>    - You can do nothing
>    - You can stick to the original name
>
> You will not know in advance the consequences of making one of the
> three choices, but you might make an intelligent guess or ask people
> for guidance if it is a foreign culture.
>
> Personally I would be appalled if a program I wrote was being discussed
> because the name of the program was the main reason to discuss the
> program and not the merits or deficiencies of the program. I would
> immediately change the name - but that's me.
>
> personally I think we should celebrate the fact that there are
> 14,609 repositories on Git hub.
>
> The fact that one of them has attracted a lot of publicity should not
> detract from either the community or the other 14,608 repositories.
>
> 3) Is the language going to be diminished if we stop using certain words
>
> No of course not - people are inventing new words all the time - words  
> going
> in and out of fashion has always happened.
>
> I'd rather be known as the inventor of a splendid new word than as a
> defender of the right of people to use old words whose 'best use
> before date' has expired.
>
> If you hear a public figure using a controversial word that causes a
> storm of protest (this happens now and then, you can possibly think of
> an example of this) my immediate thought is "What don't they want us
> to be talking about."
>
> Words elicit reactions - so it's good idea to know what they mean:
>
>    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
>    'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
>
>    'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so
>     many different things.'
>
>     - "Through the Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll
>
> Cheers
>
> /Joe
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Karlo Kuna <[hidden email]>  
> wrote:
>> it seems to me that the main problem is growth of classification of  
>> acts as
>> offensive in general.
>> what i mean is that in digital and (archive all) age it seems that  
>> number of
>> acts (words, expressions etc.) that are viewed as offensive only grows  
>> in
>> time, and
>> they *do not* die out. given multinational context it seems to be the  
>> truth
>> even more so.
>> not dying out is the biggest problem. it is easy to make something  
>> offensive
>> but is is very hard to emancipate the same thing  back to benign and
>> in most cases original meaning.
>>
>> moral dilemma is should we police others or should we first police our  
>> own
>> reactions? should i be offended regardless of context or should others  
>> make
>> sure that i don't have to consider context?
>>
>> should one use coon or be offended by it? with context "raccoon"
>> should one use cowboy of be offended by it? with context "genocide"
>>
>> here i must stress out that in case of cowboy intended context was  
>> actually
>> bound to tech world and i don't in any shape or form believe that author
>> was implying otherwise. but as cruel as it sounds context *is* derived  
>> from
>> historical fact packaged in perception of entertainment in less  
>> developed
>> times
>> (cartoons and etc.).
>>
>> this leads me following problems:
>> 1) how do we emancipate back words, and acts in general
>> 2) how much time should one spend in analyzing words and acts to deem  
>> them
>> acceptable
>>
>> for one i think this thread is great because it gives author and  
>> community
>> time for consideration and action before product is widely spread
>>
>> we should be kind, but also we need to be more resilient!
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:06 AM, Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Naming and Branding are not complicated things. Oh, doing it *well* can
>>> take any amount of time and effort, but the basics are very *very*
>>> straightforward. Here are two excellent example
>>>    -
>>> https://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2017/10/26/before-naming-your-startup-read-this/
>>>    - https://landor.com/thinking/how-not-to-name
>>>
>>> It really is not terribly different from software development
>>> 1) Identify the requirements for the name
>>>    - What kind of name is it? (made-up word? an experience? etc.)
>>>    - What are you trying to accomplish with the name?
>>>    - What is your target market?
>>>    - What are your evaluation criteria?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 2) Generate a bunch-a example names based on the above
>>> 3) Test these names thoroughly
>>>    - Does it sound good? In the target markets?
>>>    - Will it get misinterpreted?
>>>    - Is it confusing?
>>>    - etc.
>>> 4) Deploy to production
>>>    - Update docs
>>>    - Send out emails
>>>    - etc.
>>>
>>> In the world of Marketing, there is an entire sub-genre of Naming /
>>> Branding.  It exists because, despite the fondest beliefs of the  
>>> tech-world,
>>> Excellence does *not* win out, if you build it they *don't* come, and  
>>> just
>>> making yourself heard in the din of the marketplace is frightfully  
>>> hard.
>>>
>>> The tech world is particularly replete with the Dunning-Kruger effect -
>>> and this is rarely more apparent than when we talk about Marketing &  
>>> Sales
>>> (admit it - as you read "Marketing & Sales", you mentally added a  
>>> sarcastic
>>> tone to it, didn't you?).
>>> Sales is *hard*. Do *you* have the ego-less-ness to do cold-calling?  
>>> The
>>> stamina to repeat the same sales-pitch over and over and *OVER* again?
>>> And Marketing, well, it's just about the same - those sales funnels  
>>> don't
>>> fill themselves.
>>>
>>> Which brings me back to Naming/Branding - and the process that I  
>>> described
>>> above. Right up front, in the requirements for the name, you should be
>>> making sure that it isn't offensive. (Or, maybe you're a white  
>>> supremacist
>>> group, and *want* to be offensive! Whatever). Thing is, these are
>>> table-stakes in any brand-exercise - to the point where not doing this  
>>> is
>>> usually an actionable offense.
>>> To Jesper's point - of course the meaning of the brand-name can change.
>>> And it doesn't have to be around names like "Darkie Toothpaste" (yes,  
>>> that
>>> was a thing) - pity the manufacturer of "ISIS Chocolates", who were
>>> overtaken by world events. Hence the existence of the field of Brand
>>> Management, and nowadays Brand Safety.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is all a bit more than "Pick a name, and run with it". But  
>>> hey,
>>> the world isn't what it used to be. 30 years ago, I could fix most  
>>> anything
>>> that 'sploded in my car with the tools I had in my garage - nowadays,  
>>> not so
>>> much.
>>> Does this mean that we should al study up on marketing, or pay for  
>>> brand
>>> management, or whatever?  Not at all. It does, however, mean that we  
>>> should,
>>> at the very least, be aware that these things exist, and act  
>>> appropriately.
>>>
>>> Last of all, regarding the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument - of
>>> course you don't have to do this. It just depends on what you're  
>>> trying to
>>> get out of the marketplace - the sad truth is that the better mousetrap
>>> doesn't always win out.  The problem is that
>>>    - A poor name can nuke all the work that you've done, and all the
>>> goodwill that you've built
>>>    - At best you're going to have to spend time, energy, and money to
>>> educate the market about your product's value. Headwinds do *not* help  
>>> -
>>> you'll be fighting in the market against al the competition that  
>>> doesn't
>>> have those headwinds, and, well, is your product that much better that  
>>> the
>>> headwinds don't matter?
>>>    - You get but one chance to make a first impression, and the  
>>> product's
>>> name is, usually, that first impression.  Be aware of this in the  
>>> markets
>>> that you are targeting....
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Jesper Louis Andersen
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is very possible. This mailing list is full of folks boasting of
>>>>> writing systems that run on hundreds or thousands of nodes and  
>>>>> handle more
>>>>> load than anything else out there with amazing uptime figures And  
>>>>> somehow,
>>>>> nobody can be assed to just look up words in a search engine or use  
>>>>> the link
>>>>> Mahesh posted that is meant just for that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is good advice. I'll just add you need to keep redoing your  
>>>> search
>>>> as the list of bad words tend to change over time. So a word which is
>>>> perfect now can be "illegal" tomorrow. However, the risk of words  
>>>> changing
>>>> behind your back is much smaller. It can be literal hell for a brand  
>>>> if it
>>>> gets caught in such a fistfight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
>>> That tall bald Indian guy..
>>> Twitter |
>>> Blog |
>>> G+
>>>  |
>>> LinkedIn
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Alexey Lebedeff-2
In reply to this post by Antonio SJ Musumeci

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Antonio SJ Musumeci <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for "trash panda" w/ a shortened tool name "tp" :)

Sorry to disappoint you, but in Russia "TP" can be interpreted as an abbreviation very offensive to women. Looks like the hash naming proposed by Joe is the only viable solution at modern times.

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

Alexey Lebedeff-2
In reply to this post by Joe Armstrong-2
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Richard O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:
Did someone raise an objection to "lotor"?
Or since the French name for the animal is
apparently "raton laveur", how about "laveur"?
Surely there can be few people offended by that!
Or backtranslate from other European languages
and use "washbear".  Anyone offended by that?
Or go back to Powhatan "arahkun" and abbreviate
to "kun" (pronounced "coon").
...
How hard can it be to find an inoffensive word?
 
It's impossible, as it just have happened with "tp". Think about "Racoons killed my parents, and now I'm triggered whenever somebody mentions them in any language - so abusive project name should be changed". With a bit of "empathic" wistful thinking we can assume that any word in any language is offensive to somebody.


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
1 ... 3456