You misunderstand me.
If someone with a physical impairment says that using this word in software is harmful TO THEM, I will ABSOLUTELY believe them at face value and probably agree with the name change.
Can you find me such a person? THAT is what I was saying in my post. I don’t see any evidence of actual offense happening. I see people trying to avoid offense, but no actual disabled people taking offense.
You want documentation that gimp is offensive?
‘Gimp’ as referring to someone with a disability, is offensive. That’s not the only use of the word.
Or are you on the camp that we should rename IDE connections ‘master’ and ‘slave’ because a dark-skinned person might have a problem with that?
Pretending to not understand when an acronym spells a word
I understand exactly what it means. I am pointing out that it has more than one meaning.
The point of my original comment (which you apparently missed) was that GIMP has been called GIMP for years/decades… if in that time nobody has actually been offended by the name, then why is it important to change it now?
Let me give you an example- let’s say I make a piece of software called Web Output Parser, or WOP. Obviously ‘wop’ is a potentially offensive term, as it was once a slur that refers to people of Italian descent.
If my WEb Output Parser is used by millions over 15+ years, and not one single Italian-descent person reports offense, am I under some obligation to change the name to avoid a future offense that hasn’t occurred in almost two decades? Does the fact that the pejorative use of the word has gone out of common vocabulary make any difference?
That’s why I say it’s performant. Renaming GIMP would cause a problem for millions of people who use, modify, and distribute GIMP, all to avoid an offense that hasn’t happened in almost 20 years.
Do we have any actual documentation of anybody who might be called a ‘gimp’ actually being offended by the name? Or is this just more performant bullshit?
Every time one of these changes is made it creates confusion for thousands or millions of people. And it creates a reload on other software packages and dependencies to change the name.
It is no different than software changing and interface for the sake of changing it. You are forcing your users to relearn something they already know which has a real cost in time and potentially in dollars.
Gimp does not refer to people with movement disabilities. It stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program. You want to make things less offensive, double down on what the acronym stands for rather than changing it.
No surprise here. Their shit is overpriced and not in any meaningful way better than most competitors. Yeah there are some things like Fritos that are pretty unique, but potato chips are a dime a dozen and you can honestly get much better potato chips from other brands.
There was a quote something like no matter how bad life gets religion can always be counted on to make it worse.
Wow. That’s unreal. If I may ask were you trying to do a vasectomy (which can often be reversed) or something more permanent?
It is extremely concerning how many surgeons are happy to sterilize men on request, but push back HARD when women ask. I’ve talked to several women in this exact situation, it’s like if you’re under 30 and don’t have 5 kids you must not have any idea what you want and you lose agency over your own body. One friend who wanted this had surgeons demanding a permission slip from her husband. What the fuck? Does her body belong to him? I find this situation abhorrent. Your body your choice end of story. And if you regret the consequences that’s on you, not your doctor. And SHOULD NOT BE your doctor’s job to dictate your life plans
The really sad thing- a ground soldier forward deployed on a battlefield eating MRE kits in a trench would get a significantly better meal than this.
The name has been there for almost 20 years. If harm was going to happen, it would have already happened, would already be happening.
Consider drugs- if I invent a new drug, I have to run studies to ensure it’s not harmful. But if the drug’s been on the market for 20 years with many millions of doses consumed, I can look at the people who’ve taken it to see if it’s harmful.
What you’re saying is the drug’s been on the market for 20 years, there’s no reported harm in that time, but we should pull it off the market anyway. That makes no sense.
Can you find one single person anywhere at all who’s said ‘I’m disabled and the name GIMP is offensive’? Surely if the name hasn’t caused offense in the last two decades, it’s unlikely to cause offense in the next two decades?