On Wednesday 13 March 2002 14:09, Richard Rauch wrote:> > > "political 
correctness" is always the wrong reason to do something.  If
> > > your goal is to offend 0 people, then you might as well just stay in
> > > bed.
> >
> > Well, perhaps a better logo then would be a swastika. After all, with
> > that
> 
> I'm not sure that this deserves a response.  The image that we have
> represents several aspects of NetBSD.  I am not aware of any aspects of
> NetBSD that a swastika would represent.

Looks like you were unaware that the swastika was actually a symbol of 
entirely different meaning previous to the Nazis taking it over and doing 
their nasty deeds with it. I was not. Hence, my comment about it. The 
Nazis didn't make it up, they adopted it for themselves.

> I don't really make that association at all.  To the extent that I
> associate the original *photo* at all with war, it simply represents a
> branch of the military, its soldiers working together in support of their
> country.

But you *instantly* grasped the swastika connotations, regardless of the 
fact that it originated much, much earlier and meant something completely 
different before the Nazis got hold of it. --You understand where I'm 
headed with this right?--Thus while you appeared gravely offended by the 
suggestion, you claim that the other symbol and what it means should be 
overlooked (presumably) in the interests of being deliberately non-PC.

> The image that is on the NetBSD homepage is simply one that represents
> some aspects of NetBSD, and it mimics a well-known photo.
> 
> Do you know of anyone who's offended?

I'm honouring a request not to tell you who's mildly annoyed at it because 
he really doesn't care one way or the other. :) My point is, is that a 
smaller, cooler logo might be nifty.

> Is it possible that *we* can see Iwo Jima's flag-planting there, but that
> other people wouldn't make that association at all because the image is
> peculiar to our culture?

What relevance does this have? What happens when they find out what this 
symbol means? How annoyed would you feel if you'd been working under a 
logo that, in Japanese, actually meant, "Round eyes suck rudabega!" for 
years and then one day learned what it meant when your new Japanese friend 
wouldn't stop grinning at you? Or worse, "We killed lots of round-eyes in 
Pearl Harbor!"

> I think that the image, like an abused trademark, has lost it's implicit
> context.  It's not about WWII, or battle; it stands on its own.  And the
> NetBSD echo of it doesn't even feature any particular nationalism (though
> the use of English on the bannor is ethnocentric).

It was named in English. If it was initially named in Japanese somehow I 
feel certain we'd be quite proud of our unique naming in a sea of weird 
anagrams and made-up English derivatives. I like the name NetBSD, and so 
do lots of my Japanese friends. :)

> > Cartoony daemons with forks is nice... Personally I'd prefer something
> > more along the lines of Tijai's most incredible:
> >
> > Badass Daemon!!
> > 
http://www.magnamana.com/imagecontest/Realsoft3Dsite/2001annualrunnerup1.htm
> 
> This image doesn't suggest any of NetBSD's qualities to me.  The creature
> is ugly and baroque (I'm sure that that was the creator's intention).  It
> looks nasty, contancerous, spiteful, and probably would contradict you
> just to be contrary.  If I were to associate it with an OS, I could
> probably name one, but it wouldn't be NetBSD.  (^&

Here's what I see: A powerfully muscled, other-worldly being that is 
unstoppable, unaffected by any of our mortal concerns, not guided by any 
kind of foibled human hand. In a way, once NetBSD reaches a certain 
critical mass of developers I am convinced that it too becomes 
self-renewing. It no longer matters at that point whether users use it or 
not. The developers develop regardless of whether we get new press, and 
more developers hear about it from the core group to replace the attrition.

Ugliness is subjective: I believe it to be quite superb and "clean". It 
can't steal my girlfriend, it won't waste its time cutting me off in 
traffic, and it is quite capable of eating all those wimpy penguins! I see 
it as the quintessential being whose aims are immortal, whose abilities 
are limitless, and whose side it is VERY beneficial to be on. :)

> > Cute and cuddly just doesn't do it for me. I want a badass on my
> > desktop!!
> 
> Recall that BSD came from California, dude.  (^&

Sorry, that's lost on me. California is cute and cuddly? =] Since when?

> I don't mind thinking of my computers as amicable.

I do. If I wanted friendliness I'd be running something other than NetBSD. 
It's pure, clean, calculating; When I feed it errors, it spits errors back 
out at me. When it doesn't work, chances are good that I'm at fault, not 
the computer. I don't want it second-guessing what I want. I like having 
more than two buttons on my mice. And when I want pretty graphics, I'll 
call up an OpenGL interface and doodle around in it.

> They do what I want for the most part, and I try to keep them happy with
> power, parts, and network connections.  (^&  They don't sulk in a corner,
> ready to lash out at me, and they don't do any of the other things that
> that "creature" looks like it would do if you gave it half a chance.

But with aims we can't even guess at, why would such a creature take on 
such a human behaviour as sulking in a corner? I am not subservient to my 
machines--they are bent to my will: they are my creations that I dredged 
up from half-formed logic and components. When they break, it's not 
because I was cruel to them (though "friendliness" usually translates to 
care) but because the manufacturer who spews out these components summoned 
the wrong magic smoke to capture! Damn them!

All this subjective opinion is perfectly harmless, though, and that's my 
whole point: This creature has no historical connotations, no bad feelings 
attached to it. It's completely unlike everything else. An evil regime 
hasn't murdered millions under its Chernabog-like stare. Soldiers haven't 
commemorated battles with its image.

It *vaguely* resembles what we are told demons look like according to 
sci-fi and AD&D. But since modern Christian dogma usually states that 
Satan isn't an actual creature running around making people do bad things, 
I don't think there should be much of a worry--it's the same relation as 
the fuzzy/cuddly satan.. er.. daemon reference, except at least this one 
is a little more honest about its inspiration. :)

-sudog