9 comments

[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 27.2 ms ] thread
It's exhausting. Just, why? A decent, not-really controversial open source tech group exists. They use a native name. Okay?

Nothing about it is offensive. Nothing about it uses stereotypes. There isn't a rabid fan base mocking the culture.

You're exhausted about people who are actually effected by something, telling you about it?
Well, the actual Apache tribe at large are not the ones primarily effected by Apache server. It's tech nerds that have to live with Apache server and any PC name change. This change will would have a nontrivial cost for practically everyone involved in the project, including textbook authors and maintainers.
(comment deleted)
Many would disagree that modern Apache people affected by this. I read the blog post, and didn't find it particularly convincing.

It's also just the opinion of a few people in what seems like a fairly small organisation.

I assert a large number of people who are offended by vocabulary are offended by choice.
> The idea of the Apache as a singular, extinct tribe, one that put up a notable fight in the face of a conquering aggressor, is at the core of Natives in Tech's grievance.

It's a bit bizzare to be upset at the logic used to come up with the name, rather than be upset at the name being used.

It would have been fine if the guy naming the product had been less ignorant of history, or just hadn't written the logic down?