[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

This one time, at band camp, R. Armiento said:
> Stephen Gran wrote:
> >If it offends you, don't use it.  If it offends your site, have site
> >policy filter it.  [...]  Take a little responsibility for what you 
> >install on your computer already.
> The thing is, I *perfectly* agree with these statements. The "bug" here 
> is just about that the current setup may make it a little too easy for 
> people who will be offended by WebCollage to still accidently install 
> and use it. It is sensible to both 1) keep things available for people 
> who want to use them 2) help people avoid running things they do not 
> wish to run. Don't you agree with this general principle?
> Because then the whole thing is just a grey-zone question about the 
> balance between '1' and '2' in the specific case of WebCollage. And I 
> suggest that putting it as basically the default screensaver on every 
> kde-users desktop may be a little unbalanced towards '1'.

You are missing the point.  All that webcollage does is scrape images
off the web.  If the images are available to webcollage, they are also
available to every browser we ship, and wget and curl and on and on.
This means that a default install of Debian will allow users to surf
porn sites (or get accidentally directed to one by clicking a seemingly
innocuous link).  So?

> You miss the point that no one really asked for this "collage of web 
> images". It was a feature of the "default install" of debian testing. If 
> the user or I had known about WebCollage, we would have turned it off. 
> The point of the bug report is that this is likely to apply to most 
> workplaces. That is 1) people do not know about Webcollage 2) if they 
> knew, they would turn it off. A default that most people turn off, is 
> that a good default?

ISTR that the default KDE setup does not activate the screensavers.  It
also doesn't pick random as the default.  So this means people have to
actively change the defaults and not have any enforced site policy to
trigger this.  Again, they asked webcollage to do what it does.

> >Debian won't stop people from staring at the Sun until their eyes burn
> >out either.  Is that a grave, normal, or wishlist bug?
> Debian do not install the Sun as the default desktop wallpaper. If it 
> did, and burt the eyes of new users, that would be reported as a grave 
> bug. I rest my case.

If Debian only shipped a package that contained the Sun, and it was up
to the user to both enable it and stare at it, I would tag it wontfix or
close it.  The fact that the default rm as shipped in coreutils allows
you to remove key pieces of your system, or that vi allows you to write
offensive text, do not make them buggy packages.  They only do what you
tell them to do.
|   ,''`.					     Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :					 sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'			Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-					    http://www.debian.org |

Attachment: pgptK685z1xAq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: