Renaming Coq
sympa.inria.fr
sympa.inria.fr
But, the tool that originated in France is now a standard tool in a world where the lingua franca (pun intended) is English, and there’s no avoiding that in that environment it sounds like cock. There’s no choice here that isn’t somehow shitty, so it seems like they’re making the best decision.
In fact, on the list of new proposals for a successor name, a few proposals are pronounced “coke.”
Like how the correct pronunciation of LaTeX is "lay-tech", while obviously a lot of people pronounce it "latex".
Likewise for just changing the sound to “coke.” It’s a decision that the real sound sounds bad, with a suggestion to change it to a different sound. Same problem, same solution.
If the maintainers decide to change the sound or the spelling, I’ll call it whatever they want. And I’ll be more comfortable presenting it at work if it doesn’t sound like I’m saying cock.
If you can't reliably pronounce my name and it'll sound like a bad word when you try, then you should say what you can say safely. I don't care enough that I want you nervous or slowing down a meeting. But if you expect me to change my name to what you could say I would not.
You trying your best is okay, you requiring me to lower the bar so you can succeed is not okay.
It’s the same reason I can’t teach brainfuck. There are 10001 languages worthy of class time and these languages disqualify themselves in my opinion.
As others mentioned, "bit" means "cock" in French, but by the time you learn what a bit is, you're old enough to not laugh at it anymore. And you surely get to use Coq in your studies when you're older than when you learn about bits.
I mean, in France, laughing at your teacher because he speaks of "bits" (cocks) and you're >16yo would certainly make you look like mentally challenged.
For what it's worth, the 16 year old are usually the better behaved, as they are advanced students from high school who are beyond their peers in ability. They find the material eminently fascinating and are fully engaged. The ones to watch out for are the 21 year olds.
I personally learned Coq at 14. Who are you to decide what's interesting and useful to 16 year olds?
Maybe that's a bit too touchy-feely, but from a more ruthless, "only the course material matters" perspective, fine, let the kids who can't get over the name suffer the consequences. The kids who take it in stride will have an advantage. Nothing wrong with that.
You seem to be infantilizing a lot of women.
I mean, yeah, probably. Either through embarrassment or immaturity. Which, granted, isn't the end of the world, but I'd feel the need to qualify it with an explanation every time I mentioned it, and would probably think about switching to an alternative if I had to talk about it a lot.
It's not quite the same situation, but I switched to Glimpse so I didn't have to keep explaining GIMP to non-techies who saw it on my computer and asked. I would however consider that less excusable, since it's not an innocent word in the program's native language in the same way as Coq.
It is definitely infantilizing to assume that any group can't adopt/use a word if they want, really has nothing to do with genders or anything like that as you seem to assert. Women don't have some unique historical relationship to the word "cock", and even if they did I don't think that would be a great reason. The black community reclaimed the N word, and that word is so extremely polarizing / offensive I'm calling it "the N word"! It's not about "toughing it out", it's about growing up and recognizing that words are whatever you want them to be.
You seem to suggest those people train everybody around them to change behavior.
Meanwhile, every company picking a brand name will do the smart thing and avoid anything ridiculous in any of their target market; yet somehow if this happens in public it’s a scandal.
Yes, I would prefer that as well. Instead of indefinitely (and rather defensively) change the names of things that might be deemed offensive, educate people that there are contexts in which they shouldn't give in to their infantile impulses.
I mean, doctors can do it.. SW engineers too, probably.
Anyways, yes we could require him to change his name because it's distracting. That would be one thing to do. It's the solution suggested by people in this thread...
There's a difference of magnitude, in that one is a guy's name and the other is a guy's project's name. But no, I don't see a fundamental difference.
Welcome to 2021. If you're born with one or more of certain immutable characteristics, you're automatically a victim who needs to be protected and rescued. Every person with certain immutable characteristics of a different category are all personally to blame.
So, being slightly naive and maybe stupid, he told the Romanian main referee to book "the Black one", in Romanian. Black in Romanian is "negru". And it's not offensive (maybe a bit too colloquial for the setting), we have a ton of offensive words he could have used. Ironically, they wouldn't have understood any of the truly offensive words, I'm quite sure.
Because a ton of the folks around being English speakers you can figure out how this ended.
From a certain perspective you could say it's cultural imperialism.
Black Negro Nero Preto
Still, a lot of Spanish farmers drive one impervious to its slang meaning. This is probably because it actually does the thing they need it for, does it well, and they have better things to do.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bite
Even without knowing French, you can kind of make out this part:
« Bite » est une expression d'argot désignant vulgairement le pénis.
But, on reading the discussion page, I realized I forgot about kids and students, especially women, and in that context, even though changing the name is obviously not the best or most important way to solve the problem, it could be a great mitigation and is worth doing.
Following that train of thought, given that kids will eventually encounter something that makes them giggle, mightn't it be good for them to do that and get used to being "professional" as early as possible? (Though there's probably an age below which getting them to stop giggling wouldn't work at all.)
Last, considering the case of a male professor that makes sexual innuendo towards female students as a come-on... I don't know how these things work, but is it possible that this would make it easier for the girls to figure out that he's "creepy" and someone they should avoid (possibly even giving him a reputation they learn about before meeting him), thus reducing the likelihood that he's in a position to do something worse? In fact, given today's neopuritan colleges, it seems likely that him doing that might in itself get him fired; or at least it could put him on thin ice, to be more immediately condemned if students start accusing him of doing worse things.
I don't know if the above scenarios would actually happen that way. But I do suspect that the people arguing to get the name removed haven't thought through second-order effects like those.
Cock means "adult male bird" in English as well. See: cockfighting[0]
Names are arbitrary, why should anyone be so attached to this name, or any other name, idiom, or figure of speech that offends, embarrasses or diminishes others? Because historically we've been able to get away with it?
If you don't care that's fine, but please don't sound so hard done by because people are thinking about how other people feel.
What a shitty comment.
They aren't though. This isn't about the poor (theoretical) coq-sayer, this is about the righteousness of the name decriers. If you can't point to a real victim we're better off assuming there isn't one and that you're just trying to look hip.
> any other name, idiom, or figure of speech that offends, embarrasses or diminishes others?
Sure, if it did actually diminish people someone would take you seriously. If the product was named after a slur, actually referencing it, and rudely. Like "TheMick, a project to track alcoholism".
But who is hurt by the concept that words in one language sound like different words in another? And is the speaker of the first language to blame or the speaker of the second who hears a dirty word? Allocate blame here, that we may smite the wicked.
> I guess you don't find it embarrassing so you don't see the problem
Even if I did I'd be hard pressed to tell some French people that they have to change because of my sexual puritanism. Is the left into forcing America's sexual mores on people again this week?
That would be for computing in general. When it comes to proving software, France's academia seems to be one of the few that takes "making working software" as a serious development for the future (maybe because of airplanes and nuclear power plants). They're actually in the forefront here, if not leading.
The correct response to "Coq sounds funny in English" should be:
"Maybe just learn French?".
There's hardly a single word in existence that can't be turned into an innuendo, or sound the same as a rude or funny word in another language.
If you want to reinforce the notion that cock can only mean penis, this is one hell of a way to do it! Meanwhile, cock is a common term of affection in Northern England ("Cheers, cock", although it might sound more like 'cyock') and also features in the name of countless pubs.
It's one of those things that says more about the accusers.
Great response, bonus points for having that totally smug tone that could come from a Parisian that had a bad morning.
I aknowledge English as the lingua franca of our digital world, but that doesn't mean that we should be attached to every aspect of English speakers cultural environments, basically because we have our own environments too, and are just as valid as theirs.
Is there any evidence of this?
I can easily imagine authors making that decision voluntarily.
Almost all dissenters in the thread (possibly all of them, I don't remember) do not work for Inria, the research institute at which Coq is professionally developed. Though they are community members like me (I am lightly in favor of the change, and I am both a contributor and a user).
There are people with the surname Le Coq.
This Anglo-centrism bothers me as well, because we can find words in English that sound dirty in other languages.
I'm neither English nor French. I've never seen anything else than a rooster in the name or the logo.
Obviously the very purpose of double entendres is to troll those who will get the second meaning. duh!
It is not the case that trolling English speakers was the primary motivation of Huet. My understanding is that the trolling was a side-benefit to a name he would have chosen regardless of whether it evinced the double entendre.
- We have something with a localized name (uncommon for a software tool) that bother English speakers
- The English speaker changed the original poultry meaning to the modern slang by themselves
- We rename it to something neutral and in the alternative names you have ... English propositions, and arguing about it in english
It's like a double win for the English world, almost like a embrace, extend and extinguish strategy.I hope the tool ended up with a non-english alternative. As I am in "the either everything is fine or nothing is fine" team, maybe I am a little biased on the subject.
It would be a shame to not use a French name though. I don't know about Chapon (it's a bit on the nose to have the new name be "Coq, but emasculated"). I vote for "Canard", which would also be sort-of funny in English.
> Hugo reminds of us of the history of the current logo, which is a reference to the Barcelos Coq from Portugal which Gérard Huet liked, whose shape was drawn by Julien Narboux and adapted/colored for the website by Jean-Marc Notin.
The story seems legit to me, knowing some of the people. I believe there were no jokes in the logo itself, but could be wrong. This was from a time where research projects had many hand-made logos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine#/media/File:Be...
Why do some folks have to change it's project name regardless of it's meaning in another language? Coq's name wasn't meant to be offensive.
What would happen if the new name is considered an offensive or uncomfortable word in any other language? would that be a good enough reason to reconsider it? Or we only care about english speaking minds?
If coq's team is fine with it, I'm fine with it (maybe they want to have more users and thats a legit reason to change it).
But this sounds like some sort of peer presure to change it.
I believe it is pretty clever to defy them by using a French word that sounds a little inappropriate in English, if that were the case. Totally legal. But if its not, why should we, non-US Citizens, have to bare linguistic and cultural impositions because some feel 'uncomfortable' with the way we express in our own languages? Totally non-sense.
Please stop spreading bullshit. French don’t "freak out" for being spoken to in English. A lot of people in the older generation don’t have a good command of the language, that’s it. The situation is not very different from a lot of other countries.
This happened to me in Germany also, so I started approaching people by saluting them in Spanish, which is my main language, and they had a different reaction (a very positive one) than those who I said hi to in English.
It's not bullshit. Many people have an anti-american feeling in a cultural sense. (not saying I'm endorsing it)
This is simply not true. There's plenty of commonly used English names that are offensive in other languages.
On the other hand, it is kind of hilarious to fall out of your abstraction-tunnel for a moment when citing a source called "A short presentation of Coq".
Anyway, I really feel we need to make at least a few more deliberate puns before they change the name. Maybe just end every sentence referring to Coq in an ambiguous manner with "pardon my French."
It it immature to worry about that? Sure, people probably should grow up at some level, but the fact is that I don't really have a magic wand to automatically change the maturity level of every engineer I might ever work with, and those engineers can as a result use it to make people feel unwelcome in tech.
Wow, I discover now that it is supposed to be pronounced more like coke
I particularly like Chapon, if the name was to change (from the announcement: this is not yet a commitment toward a renaming)
I understand their predicament and agree it needs a new name though (it’s actually surprising how long they’ve gone before accepting that it’s a problem, in such an anglo-dominated field as computing). I just don’t think they’ll find a solution if they stay “around a farm”... I mean, looking at other names they have, gallina in Italian is a hen, but also a very common negative slang for “stupid woman” - any Italian woman using that language would feel horribly. The whole farm-related imagery is ripe for this sort of thing.
dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum ("I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am")
Unfortunately some women actually in the Coq community discussing this on Twitter noticed they were getting all of a sudden a lot more engagement with concern trolls around the time this submission gained traction. "intellectual curiosity" indeed. I hope its worth it, this place existing. I think I can find a replacement though so I'm logging off indefinitely.
This is a sad day for the revenge of french on english.
Is Lean going to be renamed too next ? immature people might mistake me for a proud drug user.
But the vowel is also different in cock [kɒk] vs coq [kɔk].
EDIT: I think I missed the point, if I'm reading "32 bits" in a french text then yes of course it sounds exactly like "32 bites".
My impression in France was that "bite" had the "i" sound slightly longer than in "bit". Some of the pronounciations at https://forvo.com/word/bite/#fr definitely lengthen it, but not all. Unfortunately there is only one recording for https://forvo.com/word/bit/#fr for comparison.
Then I remembered my telecom classes and we use octets because there's no confusion regarding byte sizes in older differet architectures.
I was just thinking of a few other names that I find amusing but I can definitely imagine people abusing:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
- Aircraft Incident Data Store (AIDS. This was renamed)
(this is mailing list)
Here are some other links related to the discussion:
* wiki, where anyone can add proposals: https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names
* chat: https://coq.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/237655-Miscellaneou...
These re-namings always follow the same pattern. Some professionally oppressed people contact a project, provide mostly secret evidence to members of the project's progressive faction.
After the re-naming they are never heard of again.
Coq isn't pronounced like "cock" at all by the French. As a first crude approximation, it is more like "coke".
In the Oxford dictionary, "cock" means "a male bird, esp. a male domestic fowl". There's cockroach, cockpit, cockney ...
So U.S. cultural imperialism wins again.
I'm saying this as a person who had problems with the NNTP "suck" program, so I do understand aversions to names, if they are legitimate.
Yes it is: https://forvo.com/word/coq/#fr
> As a first crude approximation, it is more like "coke".
No it isn't: https://forvo.com/word/coke/#en
> After the re-naming they are never heard of again.
Beyond all other corrections, the people complaining here are professional Coq users of both genders.
Hello, I'm the woman who chimed in with the story of the Uber driver harassing me. I'm not just a Coq expert (check my publications), but also a contributor to the proof assistant (check my Github). Every year during non-pandemic times I go to France for a week for the Coq Users & Developers Workshop, and I am quite close with the team.
I also hear "Coq" before "cock" when people say either of those words, naturally, since I spend so much time working on Coq. Unfortunately, this means that in public I frequently forget that almost everyone who has never heard of it before hears "cock," and this is what most often gets me into bad situations like in the Uber.
The problem isn't that we are community outsiders; it's that you can't imagine us being community insiders.
Also, many on the core Coq development teams at Inria just feel this is bad branding for them at this point, as it inhibits adoption of the tool internationally.
The Coq development team acknowledges the recent discussions (started on the Coq-Club mailing list) around Coq's logo and name.
We wish to thank everyone that participated in these discussions. Testimonies from people who experienced harassment or awkward situations, reports about students (notably women) who ended up not learning / using Coq because of its name, were all very important so that the community could fully recognize the impact of the current name and its slang meaning in English, especially with respect to gender-diversity in the Coq community.
The point I'm making here is that it's perfectly possible for millions of adults to use a tool with an offensive name without causing a big fuss and demanding everyone change everything. These constant word battles over software identifiers is toxic and immature.
In naming things to make English speakers comfortable, we're implicitly identifying that other languages and cultures are less important.
1) French for duck which keeps the with the language history.
2) it’s a loan word into English for unfounded rumor. Which is kind of fun.
3) the second English definition: “small winglike projection attached to an aircraft forward of the main wing to provide extra stability or control” What does a theorem prover do if not provide extra stability or control to our own understanding? (This one’s a bit of a stretch.)
> others getting harassed when they said they were working on Coq
It's hard for me to imagine anyone getting harassed over this, who are these people who haven't moved past puberty but are in a professional environment? Is there any examples of this happening in the wild online?
Looking through the examples, if the problem is that people cannot hear something that sounds like "cock" without harassing people, you probably need to chose a name that sounds nothing like it, rather than just a slight modification. Coquito, PeaCoq, Coqpit, Côq, Coq au vin, Le Coq, Coqorico, Coqueluche, Coque, Coqroach etc all sound too familiar and if the purpose is to stop harassment, none of those would be real options.
Edit: on second thought, I wonder if the people who harassed others over using Coq also harass people who are using Git. Why/why not?
Professionalism is hardly universal.
Flat out disgusting, not to mention illegal.
I'm talking about the harassment part here, not professionalism in general.
Sure, one crass dude is one crass dude. One crass manager sets the tone for the team.
Pretty soon people starting pushing the boundaries on how insulting they could be.
To me "professionalism" doesn't mean anything. Just try to be good. Be on time, not because it's professional, but because wasting other people's time is disrespectful.
My problem with "professionalism" is that you can be "professional" by not swearing, wearing a nice suit and never raising your voice - but still being a complete asshole (in particular when the going gets hard). I've met people like that.
I feel like there's hardly any correlation between swearing and "decency" (acting like a good human being). In fact, there might even be a slightly positive correlation, since people will tend to cut you much less slack for such egregious behavior (unless you are at the very top of the chain, I suppose).
The study I've linked below is slightly flawed, but it does provide a small nugget of evidence to your anecdote.
[1]: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/sites/gsb/files/publication-pdf...
But also, some folks (for reasons that may or may not resonate with others) might not enjoy working in an environment where they are called 'motherfuckers', 'little shits', etc.
All that said, I think a good balance is
1. Embrace a level of crassness that feels friendly and comfortable for all. In some cases this means very little or no crassness. In most cases it shouldn’t mean anything that would be posted on CollegeHumor or whatever.
2. Clearly set expectations that any such humor is expected to be in good faith, which implies both actively understanding commonly hurtful humor to avoid; and encouraging, embracing and actively addressing feedback when anything is unintentionally hurtful; actively disincentivizing and penalizing bad faith behavior.
All of that said: I personally have no gripe with being called a “fucker” but I’d prefer “motherfucker” not be used in a workplace for pretty much arbitrary reasons. I have no problem at all being called a “little shit” (or any other size of shit). Applying the principles above, if I were starting or growing a group/team/org, on first usage I’d probably invite people to say if it made them feel uncomfortable, or if it would make them uncomfortable had it been said to them. If anyone said so, or even just hesitated, I’d suggest that I’m comfortable with the personal interaction in private but it shouldn’t be a part of public communication for the group or private communication without express consent. And I’d invite anyone who felt that wasn’t being honored to come to me if they weren’t comfortable speaking up.
All of thaaaaat said: my original intent was to end this comment jokingly inviting all of HN to call me a fucker or any size of shit, but I couldn’t think of a way to do it and allow downthread discussion without contradicting my own principles. So if anyone here wants to call me names for fun or just to get your rude fix, my email link is public and a pretty quick set of clicks away: profile > personal site > resume
Others posted similar things, but imagine that you're a female PhD candidate and your male advisor asks you: "How familiar are you with Coq?" or "Are you good with Coq?"
Sure, the advisor could have asked "How familiar are you with the theorem prover Coq?" but it shouldn't be necessary to do so.
It seems petty and childish to be considering a name change over this, but it is far from unprecedented (e.g. "Beaver College" changed their name to "Arcadia University" in 2001). Having a more utterable name can lead to more widespread use and discussion of the tool with laypeople.
Second, Coq sounds kinda like a slang word in English, so it must be changed; bit is pronounced exactly like the slang word for the same thing in French, but you would be laughed at if you suggest changing bit something less offensive like bigit? For many of us non-anglophones, the creeping English-language supremacy is neither natural and inevitable nor welcome.
Yeah, a bit awkward for about 5 seconds until both parties know what you're talking about, because of context.
Is that what the authors are referring to as "harassment" or where does the whole harassment come from? That's my biggest question here. I have nothing against people wanting it to change, I just want to understand the reasoning behind it, and how even people manage to harass others via a project name.
I've been shocked by the daily harassment and hostility that I have to put up with now. The jokes people make about me that they think are "no big deal". People can be unapologetically terrible, and yes pre-pubescent level harassment happens all the time, even in professional environments. It's just not something that you can understand unless you've been in that position.
And yes, if it's important, I'm "part" of a couple of marginalized groups myself, but I'm not sure how that's important here.
No, I'm genuinely asking about what they are talking about. I'm literally asking clarifying questions here in order to find out more. I'm not stating how anything is, but merely wonder and want to learn more.
I do experience harassment as well, but not in the form of hearing "Oh, you use Coq so you must be a cock" every day, which is why I ask how the project name can be used as harassment.
What? I'm sorry but we're talking way past each other and seem to be having two different conversations here. I'm inquiring about the usage of "harassment" from the authors of the proposed change, and you take it as I'm "asserting my point of view"?
Please do try to spread flame somewhere else but not here. I'm now done trying to explain myself to you.
Oddly enough, British people don't go around demanding git be renamed. We know how to handle words having multiple meanings.
I'll keep that in mind though if I work with folks in the UK at some point.
It's really quite self centred to create new problems for the entire world because of a taxi driver. Think about how many people will now have to double search for things, or change scripts, or waste time because they didn't realise new tool=old tool. It's a huge new technical debt being created here. Coq is software, it's been around for many years, so the old name will never die. People will be dealing with half baked renames and duplications forever.
Immature people will find ways to be immature and annoying no matter what - the difference between adults and children is we're supposed to be able to deal with it and keep things in proportion. That doesn't seem to be happening here and it's a pity.
Please don't accuse others of "not engaging in good faith" when they just outlined to you the rational basis for their viewpoints. It's just an ad-hominem insult. My engagement is in entirely good faith: I think you (and others making these demands) are refusing to consider the impact of your demands on other people, externalizing costs unnecessarily and generally acting in anti-social ways, whilst claiming the exact opposite.
Not to mention, we don't need to debate - the team studied this and discovered that it is causing real problems for real people, even among those who are familiar with the name.
Overall, this all just proves that it's a bad name. It may not be worth it to change it, and it would be absurd to blame or attack anyone for coming up with the original name, but it should be recognized that it's a bad name.
Unmistakably of a poultry origin and with a bonus reference to the chicken and egg problem. Theorem proving and all.
* wiki, where anyone can add proposals: https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names
* chat: https://coq.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/237655-Miscellaneou...
The first thing that comes to mind when I see it is "mendacious" so maybe not.
I used to know a bunch of people at a company named Incipient. It made it onto many lists of worst company names because nobody knows what it means but they do know what "insipid" means. I did work at a company named Revivio, which was mostly funny because it's hard to spell it out without sounding like Old McDonald.
I didn't particularly mind the name, although it was kind of puerile. What I did increasingly mind is that every time I googled for it Google would come back with, "Did you mean testicular cancer?" (yes, really - this is not something I'd choose to joke about) and then show me results for that until I clicked through what it thought was the misspelled alternative.
That became rather tedious in fairly short order, and I suppose you could argue the name was in rather poor taste (though I was never particularly bothered), so I was immeasurably relieved when the team running the project chose to rename it to Karma.
I don't tend to get too bent out of shape about names in general since it's something of a programmer/engineer trope to occasionally use let's say more characterful names for projects and symbols and whilst there's a time and a place I'd hate to see it go away entirely.
We got a memo that said not to use 'RS' in the name.
Apparently in the U.S. the use of 'BS' for Bullshit has Australian equivalent of 'RS' for Ratshit. Thus, the RatShit/6000 was born.
I found it funny but apparently the Marketing people didn't.
I teach maths and English in the Danish public school to 14/15 year olds. The English word "pig" sounds a lot like "pik" (dick/dong/prick,etc) to Danish ears. I get to emphasise the distinction between hard-g and k, and the kids have a giggle at my expense. So what? I wish these puritanical idiots trying to control language and thought could get over themselves.
I am very happy to be living in a country which is not yet thoroughly infected by the PC poison seeping out of the anglosphere.
Edit: I was just thinking of a few other names that I find amusing but I can definitely imagine people abusing:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
- Aircraft Incident Data Store (AIDS. This was renamed)
Yeah, immaturity can be insidious. Even I find myself "looking for the joke" sometimes because my team at work is so silly with innuendo. Mostly harmless, but I wish it were different sometimes.
There's another incident recently with a building proposal in NYC for a building called Penn 15. Because so many Americans still latch on to grade school humor, we can't get past the fact that if you remove an "n" it looks like Pen 15, or Penis if you squint and make enough puns.
They should rename the language to Cock, as in cocking a gun, cocking your head, or another name for a rooster. Grow the fuck up already.
Maybe the offending name as you personally initially interpreted, made you think it means something else. Perhaps you just need to seek more context around a name? Perhaps Coq needs to provide a more upfront representation and information of their chosen name?
I honestly don't disagree or agree and think we could all grow up a bit and have a more mature society if we didn't focus on petty insignificant changes to things like this.
And even if it weren't making people uncomfortable, the fact is that it's harder to get management to sign off on using something like Coq if they feel it sounds like an "HR Violation Waiting to Happen". Changing to something more innocuous might work to get Coq used more in industry. As it stands, I almost never mention it at work anymore, and instead talk about TLAPS and Isabelle whenever I need to mention proof systems.
At the same time, I feel like it's really easy for me to say stuff like that, as a white male working in tech, a group that's never been unwelcome in STEM (at least not in my lifetime).
"Polla".
It's just the national lottery in Chile.
IMO, the best route forward is to move completely away from coq and towards something else (like their gallus proposal).
"Hi, cool tool, but we need to change the name to be Rooster, otherwise Americans will be offended because Coq sounds similar to body part slang (and they can't be bothered to look up the origin of the word despite its curious spelling)."
I think we need to seriously take a look at our word outrage culture. My brother works at Cerner and recently had to drop everything to address a ticket that was prioritized above all other tickets (including patient safety tickets). He had VPs breathing down his neck until it was fixed. The ticket? The spell-checker in one of Cerner's tools suggests the n-word if you happened to misspell something similar to it (for example if you misspelled "niggard", which means stingy person). He literally had to completely remove the word from the spell check dictionary before the VPs were satisfied.
"Sticks and stones" is apparently a deprecated/obsolete proverb in 2021.
First off, who is "we" in this case? Society? The government? Professors?
I don't really see this as "outrage culture". I haven't seen a bunch of bunch of posts on Twitter saying #cancelInria or anything like that. They merely saw that the name was being used to make people feel unwelcome, and decided to change it.
>We wish to thank everyone that participated in these discussions. Testimonies from people who experienced harassment or awkward situations, reports about students (notably women) who ended up not learning / using Coq because of its name, were all very important so that the community could fully recognize the impact of the current name and its slang meaning in English, especially with respect to gender-diversity in the Coq community.
Seriously there are some people getting shocked that a foreign word sounds like slang for male genitals in their language?
These people seriously need to grow up and accept that not everything is centered around their world.
"bit" is slang for cock in French, "chat" is slang for vagina, "Nike" means fuck, should we rename these so that it does not shock anyone? Where's the limit?
EDIT:
Turns out I was misunderstanding the context; I misread it as something like "look how offended these people get omg", but in reality it looks like the poster was saying that it's sad that we live in a world where this might need to be changed [1]. Entirely my fault!
The word "peacock" is now only really useful in streaming TV.
Fun fact: Rooster Rock in Oregon looks nothing like a rooster, because it was originally Cock Rock. Because that's what it looks like, and even the Indians named it for that.
I remember childhood-me finding that name quite amusing.
Of course I'm much too grown up now to find it funny....
I'm surprised this is a serious proposal. I can see everyone having fun with this at the project's expense.
The concern around women, NBs, and others being harassed for mentioning their work on the project is good feedback which I doubt many straight white men would've noticed or envisioned organically, so kudos to Wolf putting that concern front and center. It's a good reminder for why we should include diverse voices with us on a level decisioning/playing field.