A Megahbite of Megan - Latest Comments

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Bluebie — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 02:54:33 -0000

The problem with git isn't that the names are immutable, it's that the names are specified to be 'Real Names', and that most associated software automatically imports people's legally registered names from their operating system account in to the git settings, making the default and socially accepted form in every way undisputedly a person's registered legal name. On self administered systems it is natural that someone may enter their legally registered name in to a "Full Name" field when setting up an account, but on some systems (notably OS X) the user account inherits these details from forms filled out to register for warranty or from web accounts like apple's iCloud, which has your legal name for the purposes of billing in iTunes and in App Stores. Git could completely solve this cissexism problem without rearchitecting anything by replacing names with globally identified self assigned identities - i.e. nicknames. Most of us already have established handles on the web, including on sites like Github. My personal experience was surprise when I realised that despite hosting repositories on Github at web addresses which used a handle, git had automatically included my full name imported from my OS in every commit, and those commits were preserved and available to anyone - also including my personal email address.

To say that solving this problem is too hard because of architecture is a straw man - the only thing that needs be changed to resolve this are user interface elements. By removing the expectation that people will use their full legal name, the downsides of using a handle disappear and it becomes the default of many users. By auto-populating the name field with the user's operating system username instead of their user's "Full Name", people who are inclined towards pseudonymous handles are protected without having to make a political statement by bucking against expectations. That this problem still hasn't been fixed considering the age of this blog post is surprising to me.

As a woman and lead developer of a popular open source project, I was just days ago the subject of sexist jokes and then accusations of being a 'bitch' for not following the advice of a random person with more penises than me. If my identity as a woman hadn't been automatically outed by software, I wouldn't have received that abuse. These days I have enough experience to deal with things like that, but I have many friends who are not so tough, who would be much less inclined to keep contributing after receiving bullying like that. I don't want to see computer science shift further towards being a boys club. I hope the maintainers of Git will consider the importance of this - but given it's linux kernel heritage and Linus Torvolds famously abusive personality and "management style" of bullying, I guess it makes sense that git is just another tool in their arsenal of oppression. Still I'd rather use git than svn, so I guess the world just sucks for people like me (the 51%)

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Jake Boxer — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 01:17:10 -0000

Sorry, that's not what I was saying. I meant, even if some of the creators of Git had been transgendered and had experienced this kind of discrimination, I think names in Git commits still would've been made immutable, because making any part of the Git commit object mutable without changing the SHA would be such a massive architectural change.

Either of us could be totally wrong since we're both just guessing about what the creators thought or would have thought. Just trying to explain what made the title throw me off.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 01:00:05 -0000

I strongly believe the problem would exist even if the discrimination had been considered.

Well I agree there but that's because it would have been considered a "non-issue" because it's still perfectly acceptable for this kind of discrimination to occur in society. If it affected the guys who authored git in the same way, it never would have happened.

Something being patriarchal doesn't mean someone got up in the morning and thought "hmm, I'll oppress minorities today", it's often a passive, thoughtless thing. Thinking that the social majority is the default and only their experiences matter, never questioning how it could affect minorities.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

maiki — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:40:27 -0000

As Megan pointed out at http://megan.geek.nz/how-gi..., presenting past work as your own under a different identity can have a severe effect for transgendered folks, as well as other people, most of which are women.

But I don't think you were asking those questions to be answered, it seems like you are being rhetorical concerning a topic that you don't think affects you or Megan as much as e claims. It seem insincere, so if I am reading the comment incorrectly, please rephrase it in a more compassionate tone. ^_^

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Jake Boxer — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:19:59 -0000

Ah, got it. I was totally unaware of that. Thanks a bunch for the explanation.

I see the core point of this article as "here's a shitty issue with Git that only transgendered people have to deal with, and because of the patriarchal nature of the software industry, it was probably never even considered." I agree with that as a core point.

The title of this post threw me off a little. I don't agree that the existence of the name immutability problem shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry, because I strongly believe the problem would exist even if the discrimination had been considered. But that's entirely subjective guesswork, and seems unrelated to the core point as I understood it. The name change for marriage example also threw me off a little, since it's not any worse than an email change.

Either way, thanks a bunch for taking the time to explain stuff to me and clarify. Reading the post and adjusting my thoughts based on your explanations was pretty cool.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:52:38 -0000

Patriarchy as a concept in third wave feminism is not just "man's domination over women". It recognises the intersectional (http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... ) nature of privilege. It's the way society and by proxy the privileged majority perpetuates a system that harms *everyone* but especially those on certain axis of privilege. Yes it recognises that men are harmed by the patriarchy too, through oppressive gender roles.

Some people call this kyriarchy instead but less people are familiar with that term.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Jake Boxer — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:44:15 -0000

Got it. I totally agree. Thanks again for pointing it out; definitely did not consider that angle before, and I appreciate being shown it.

Because of that, I definitely do agree with you that this is a much shittier issue for transgendered people than it is for cisgendered people. However, I wouldn't relate it to a patriarchal nature. To me so far, this seems like an issue for all transgendered people regardless of their identified gender, not an issue of male control over women.

The name change for marriage example you gave would show a patriarchal nature, but it seems much closer to the email address issue to me. As far as I'm aware, people aren't discriminated against for changing their last name for marriage, so the "grin and bear it" option seems equally palatable.

Are there other problems that the name immutability causes that are patriarchal in nature? To be clear, I'm not trying to prove you wrong (you've already shown me something I hadn't considered on the trans part); just trying to understand the article better.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:19:20 -0000

Yes. Most jurisdictions (including those outside the US in more "liberal" countries) have zero protection for employment discrimination on the basis of gender identity leading to horrific statistics on unemployment (double the rate of unemployment, 90% experiencing harassment in the workplace in the US as outlined in this survey http://www.thetaskforce.org... ). Frankly equating email addresses with names is trivialising the issues.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Jake Boxer — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:00:16 -0000

Just to make sure I understand: you're saying here that the "grin and bear it" option is much more palatable for email address changes than for trans name changes? If so, I definitely agree, and it makes the article way more interesting/compelling to me, so thanks for pointing it out :) If not, could you further explain what you mean?

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 22:43:54 -0000

Email immutability is a problem but pretty trivial to all parties compared to the issues name changes cause. It's not like people discriminate on the basis of your past email address or deny your identity based on it. If you say "I've changed my email on my commits because I've changed job", people just accept that.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Jake Boxer — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 22:30:10 -0000

If I read this post as "here's a difficulty that I faced when using Git because I am trans and a woman, and people who are not these things probably would not have thought of this problem," I find it very informative and interesting.

If I read this post as "Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry," I find it flawed.

In the article, you say "It has probably never crossed the minds of the creators of Git that this could be such a huge problem to a non-cis or non-male person." However, I think the exact same problem exists if you change your email address, which is probably something that the creators of Git have done multiple times.

I definitely do agree that the software industry is patriarchal in nature. I also agree that the name change problem is one that is much more likely to be experienced by a non-cis or a non-male than by a cis male. I just don't think the existence of that problem *shows* that patriarchal nature, given that the problem also exists for email address changing.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

maiki — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 14:37:15 -0000

You are speaking from a place of priviledge, where you've never had to question using your real name. Also, you response isn't very compassionate. You are talking to a real person, so please be more considerate.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:20:57 -0000

I really liked your comments about the larger issue on your LJ, it's very much a fallacy that people like to hold dear that names are immutable.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan (another one :) — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:15:34 -0000

I wrote a response to this on my LJ (linked in 'website'). I don't really have a technical solution for you, not that the Git developers would care if I did. :) But I think that this is really a part of a larger issue with people trying to assign unchanging identifiers (typically legal names) to people. Some people do it out of habit, but I think on a conscious level it's a means of control.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Seth Woodworth (@sethish) — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:25:22 -0000

This is the take I like the best. I think that it points the finger of blame on the culture around git instead of the technical implementation of immutable histories. I don't think that user.name need actually be deprecated as much as the expectation be that people use genderless pseudonyms. But does that just take us back to the 4chan problem, "there are no girls on the internet", assuming that everyone you interact with online is a white cis-gendered male?

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

J. C. Salomon — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 21:46:29 -0000

Cancel that bit about reposurgeon; it (currently, at least) only handles metadata.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

J. C. Salomon — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 21:22:14 -0000

Is there a filter-branch operation that will also change names within files; e.g., for embedded copyright notices or AUTHORS files? (“I’m impressed with this project you wrote, Alice; but why does the copyright read Bob?”) But not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good…

Dumping to git-fast-import format, running search-and-replace Bob to Alice, may be a surer thing. (And you’ll need to adjust blobs from using length markers to the delineated format, or use ESR’s reposurgeon.) And this definitely touches more than metadata and can only be done on repos you own. But if you’re rewriting history, do it right.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

wilkie (@DaveWilkinsonII) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 18:39:18 -0000

Yeah. That's true. Such a change could be monitored like that, yes. Read my other responses.

What is interesting is that such a person would be able to say 'Hey! That person changed their name, everybody!" but have no verifiable proof. The burden would be on them to convince somebody else that such a thing happened. Everybody else in the world would go to the identity service and see one name and no history about the change. It'd be essentially conspiracy logic. They'd have evidence that is as good as fabricated.

Since it deals with human memory at the end of the day, this is very very likely the best we can do.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

wilkie (@DaveWilkinsonII) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 16:25:21 -0000

Agreed. There is no way to prevent this. Mostly because you are trying to counteract a memory, and you can't know for sure if somebody read it, remembered it, and noticed the change. So that's impossible to correct outside of science-fiction movies, right?

The malicious case would be, however, predicting the name change, and then polling for the name change until it happens. Once it happens, however, there is no way, outside of finding old cached history and somehow destroying it, to determine it was changed. You'd have to proactively check repeatedly. That case is impossible to solve, but completely impractical. It's like saying keypair encryption is bad because you could break it in theory with luck or even brute force. It's a true statement, however, it doesn't mean anything until somebody asserts how probable that would be.

Another angle is to relate this to normal bureaucracy. To get a name change in a typical US state, you have to get the permission of a judge. The technical solution I've proposed is morally better as it does not require announcement of the change nor forces the recording of such history. (although, some people may record it offline, as I mentioned) In a court system, name changes are public record, require notary, and require forced announcement in 2 publications. That is really terrible. And that's kind of the system git has in place currently. The solution I listed solves these moral issues without losing the worth of the author field. (it strengthens it by using signing)

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 22:28:02 -0000

Well I guess it'd be a start at least.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Maciej Piechotka — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:38:33 -0000

It also affects git-blame or at least it is included it its man page.

In any case - the simplest solution might be to file bugs against other tools to use mailmap and the problem will be solved (it is IMHO more elegant solution then changing history).

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Megan — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 00:06:35 -0000

.mailmap only affects shortlog output, nothing else.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Dana Jansens (@orodu) — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:45:40 -0000

As someone who has come from a similar situation, and since you founded this unnamed open source project and should have some decent authority within the project still.. I hope that you'll consider rewriting the git history to put your chosen name into all commits in the repository. Make people rebase onto a new tree.. it's your history to maintain, and in time you might appreciate not orphaning your code.

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

un1c0rn — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:36:04 -0000

man git-shortlog, .mailmap section

Re: How Git shows the patriarchal nature of the software industry

Maciej Piechotka — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:07:20 -0000

Why not use .mailmap files (which are at least described on git-blame manpage)? They look like solution designed to deal with this problem, If some git tools don't respect them - it looks like bug in tools, not missing feature.