My most recent challenge was recently edited to change a certain language's name to Brainf**k (i.e. censor it). I decided I might want some community input before I rolled it back, so, my question is:
Should we f***ing censor the f***ing names of f***ing programming languages?
Programming language names should, technically, not be modified. On the other hand, this language contains a word almost universally considered to be vulgar.
What does the community think?
For example, have I told you about my cock?
It is a fine cock, very big and very red.
Here is a picture of it, taken by the people at Encyclopedia Britannica:
Rhode Island Red cock
I invite you to visit their site and notice how they have captioned the picture. They use the same text that I did here. They also use it in the URL.
As an educational site, they have recognized that the word "cock" may be offensive in some instances when used with offensive intent, but it is not an inherently offensive word.
Offense is not in the word, but in how the word is applied, and toward what end.
For example, my first two sentences may be argued to edge dangerously close to the edge between pedagogical provocation and intentional offense. However, it is impossible for me to know how offensive I have truly been because offense can be achieved by intent on the part of both the giver and the receiver of the offense. Though I may have no intent to offend you, you may still intend to take offense.
To have a civil society, we need to minimize two things: the intentional giving of offense, and the intentional receiving of it. We need warm hearts with thick skins.
Or as one respondent to the linked thread quoted from the SO FAQ, "Be nice," but also "Bring your sense of humor."
Did the creators of Brainfuck mean some offense to the world when they chose that name? Possibly. But I do not believe we repeat that intent by using the name here. Here, it is merely a signifier, a tool we use to ensure we are talking about the same thing.
If we start censoring our signifiers, that impairs our educational value by making it more difficult to understand what is signified. Meanwhile, we actually add to the aura of offensive power around the word by treating it as offensive when it is being used in the most benign manner it can possibly be used.
I feel no worse using it to signify a programming language than I would asking a random stranger "hand me that fanny pack" and finding out he/she was British.
It is just--to use Brainfuck parlance--a pointer.
For those, who have already seen the word, censorship achieves nothing. They will know what word is meant, even if it's censored to mere F* (or even ****). Censorship only draws attention to that word and to the fact the language name contains a dirty word.
For those, who haven't seen the word yet (as if there were any), the context of the language name does not indicate that it should contain a swearword they might like to learn. Sure, the first half is a sensible word (but so is "lung" in "zwerglung"$), so they might be interested in what the second half means, but, searching for the censored word yields just as many 100 times as many results as searching for its uncensored version. One might argue "but, the censorship warns the kids that they don't want search for that", but really - I don't think it works this way. They want to know the words their friends might like to learn# - if they don't already*. That is, if you tell them it's a swear word. Censorship only draws attention to that word and to the fact the language name contains a dirty word.
(%) Yes. I know my footnotes are upside-down
(*) The age barrier at StackExchange is 13 years, and the vast majority of our userbase is older than that. The age barrier exists to protect very young kids from swearwords. I guess this is a reason enough to claim that swearwords are not to be particularly feared of at Stack Exchange. Not to mention you will hear the occasional f**k or two on most of the SE chats, too.%
(#) this statement is not subject to voting. I still accept disagreement in the comments.
($) I promise. I just made up this word. I didn't know it already exists.
While the use of uncensored language names doesn't bother me in the least on a personal/moral/whatever basis, it has caused some practical problems for me on a couple occasions. My employer seems to think that websites that contain a disproportionate number of occurrences of the word "f*ck" are obviously pornographic, and serves me a huge banner saying:
This can sometimes make it difficult to slack off at work and do programming puzzles, and although I doubt my employer ever checks the logs, I wouldn't exactly want to be pulled into a meeting to explain why I had set some sort of record for hitting web filters for pages with the word "f*ck" in them. My immediate boss would laugh her butt off, her boss wouldn't.
No, it's just a name. We're not hurting anybody's feelings, are we? If this was school in 1st grade, however, the teachers would prohibit it (because in 1st grade I got in trouble for saying "JackAss"), but again it's just a name. You're not going to ban someone who has profanity in their actual name anyways, right?
If I was a dog breeder I wouldn't care about the connotation of the word "bitch", I would just say "I bred the bitch last night".
I much prefer when offensive words, even in a non-offensive context, are censored. Let me explain why:
Censored words give me the chance to change my mental pronunciation. For example, I can read Brain**** as "Brain-star" or BrainF*** as "BrainF-star". And this sentence from the question here:
Should we f***ing censor the f***ing names of f***ing programming languages?
I can pronounce as:
Should we f-ing censor the f-ing names of f-ing programming languages.
Lastly, censoring does not prevent people from pronouncing it the other way. I agree that censoring does not protect youth from learning the words. However, I feel that it is reasonable to give people a choice in what to use to pronounce words.
++++[++++>---<]>-.---[----->+<]>-.+++[->+++<]>++.
++++++++.+++++.-[->+++<]>-.[++>-------<]>.+[->+++
<]>+.++++++++.>+[--->++<]>+++.[->+++++++<]>.++++++.
Since there is no way to misunderstand it, I'd say it's "BrainF**k" is fine.
I approve of censoring the name of this language. Just because the namer/inventor of this language had a dirty mind means that the universe must follow.
Yes, if necessary, but better is to rename the languages. On the occasion that the esoteric nature of such languages doesn't bring them obnoxiously close to making up your own language, why not just fork the language and improve it by giving it a name that doesn't offend many people by, for example, treating lightly a deep physical expression of love between a husband and wife?
If we could improve JavaScript we would, but backward compatibility prevents us. Languages without real-world code relying on them have no such restriction.
