• FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    I disagree with age verification as well, but attacking a person like this is gross.

    This article is all but brigading people into harassing this guy.

    • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      He got a huge amount of criticisms and negative comments from the community while he was working on this on GitHub; look at the comment thread of his implementation on GitHub. Essentially the community was telling him “we don’t want this”. And who are you working for in a FOSS project, if not for the community? Yet he disregarded the comments and went on.

      On top of this, he appeared out of the blue with this implementation. He had not made any pull requests to this git before now. Nobody had assigned this task to him.

      So the situation is not that this is some employee who was asked to implement something, and did it without knowing what the feedback would have been.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Spreading his face around doctored as if it were a mugshot in a community where people are calling him a traitor and other things is a recipe for someone to be hurt or killed.

        This thread isn’t a community discussion about implementing a feature, it’s people trying to whip up a mob to attack a person. It doesn’t matter how much you dislike the field name he added to a JSON document, you don’t stir up a mob that can lead to people getting hurt.

        • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          In principle I agree with you, pacific discussion and democracy should be the way to go. But it seems that “discussion” doesn’t lead anywhere these times. Politicians do whatever they like (or what lobbies tell them to do), without checking if the majority of the population really agree with some decisions. A developer does whatever he likes, without bothering about the more or less pacific feedback he gets on github. Nobody really seems to want to have a discussion. Well guess then what the “mob” does at some point: they don’t care about discussions anymore either, and they do as they please too.

          I fear that riots will start on a larger scale. Even if the context today is different, the situation reminds me somewhat of what happened with the 1981 riots in Toxteth, in Brixton, and other previous riots. Unjust or misused laws; deafness of authorities about discontent; innocent and not-so-innocent people getting hurt.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            A developer does whatever he likes, without bothering about the more or less pacific feedback he gets on github. Nobody really seems to want to have a discussion. Well guess then what the “mob” does at some point: they don’t care about discussions anymore either, and they do as they please too.

            It’s pretty cliche but: Two wrongs don’t make a right.

            In the FOSS world, there are many ways to handle this kind of situation. A mob-led harassment campaign is not one of them.

            If you disagree with how a project is going then you can fork it. LibreOffice disagreed with the direction of OpenOffice and forked it, NextCloud and OwnCloud forked from one another when there was major disagreement.

            At no point should volunteer developers have their face plastered on a mugshot and their personal information blasted to a mob of angry people.

            Be angry at the politicians and mega corporations who are voting and funding these initiatives, not the developers who are caught in the middle.

    • tangonov@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      A spade’s a spade. This is malicious compliance. The law might be the problem here but it’s on us to resist and try to make a change. Every last one of us. After all, the surveillance state workers in China and Russia are all just doing their jobs right?

      Why the heck would we ever want a DoB field in systemd, optional or otherwise?

      • luciferofastora@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The systemd PR also referred to a flatpak PR who said they had wanted that to allow for parental controls even before the law came. That’s a somewhat reasonable use case, in my opinion.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why the heck would we ever want a DoB field in systemd, optional or otherwise?

        There is a field for your REAL NAME and LOCATION also. Who would ever want that?

        Both of these fields contain way more identifying information about a user than birthDate. Do you feel the same way about them? Because they’ve been in systemd since the beginning.

        and the GECOS field (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecos_field) containing fields for your real name, work address, which room in the building you work in, your home and office telephone numbers and external e-mail have been in UNIX/LINUX since 1962

        This is manufactured outrage, the article is doxxing a person and painting a literal target on their head by photoshopping their picture to look like a mugshot in order to drive traffic for ad revenue.

        It’s one thing to be against the laws, I’m against the laws. It’s another thing to personally attack a developer, that’s way beyond anything that is acceptable.

        • tangonov@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          Timing’s a bit shit to add a DoB field don’t you think. I also don’t think you can compare computing in a professional setting in the 1960s to modern day surveillance states. I can also say as a parent there’s only one thing protecting your kid from the internet and its not whatever poorly standardized notion of Linux parental controls that exist today. Only actual parenting can.

          As for the developer’s publicly observable commits and the following publicly available criticism of it, you can call it painting a target but I think even that’s a bit of a stretch. What’s most outrageous about the institution that is the United States of America in 2026 is how all of it was even allowed to get so far. So yeah, expect some activism.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            I also don’t think you can compare computing in a professional setting in the 1960s to modern day surveillance states.

            My point was that the fields themselves are no more dangerous than we make them. The GECOS fields are not a thing that used to exist in the 1960s, they exist in your system in 2026.

            My point was that the criticism here isn’t about the field, because there are way ‘worse’ fields that have existed for decades. The criticism is about the law and this is a kind of misplaced activisim. Where it goes wrong is deliberately targeting one person for harassment as if they are the scapegoat for all of these age verification laws.

            I can also say as a parent there’s only one thing protecting your kid from the internet and its not whatever poorly standardized notion of Linux parental controls that exist today. Only actual parenting can.

            I completely agree. These laws are worthless for their stated goals because, as you’ve said, it is a parenting problem.

            As for the developer’s publicly observable commits and the following publicly available criticism of it, you can call it painting a target but I think even that’s a bit of a stretch.

            They photoshopped his face on a mugshot like he’s a criminal and in the article they list his full name, job title, place of work and the state and city where he works. They also list his personal blog.

            In addition to all of the personal details, the wording and framing of the article make it sound like an after action report on a cyberattack:

            Here’s some select quotes. This isn’t about activisim about a law, this is about painting a person as evil, bad, etc (and if you look at the comments in this post, that framing worked.

            He hit three separate projects in one week.

            Taylor believes what he’s doing is right, which makes him harder to stop than someone acting for money.

            The argument is ideological, so persuasion is off the table.

            “He’s going to be hard to stop and you can’t persuade him”

            The word for what that is sits somewhere past malice, something more insidious:

            Taylor already has the resume line and knows the codebase well enough to try again.

            “He’s going to do it again!”

            This kind of framing against a person is dangerous. If you stir up enough people on the Internet you’re going to stir up some people who are unstable and willing to act on this violent framing.

            I agree that the laws are wrong, but this kind of personal attack is far, far more immediately dangerous.

            Ask yourself, if it was your picture in the mugshot and your personal address being plastered all over Reddit would you feel safe?