On 06/10/05 01:10:22, Chris Waters wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:34:14PM +0200, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
I was complaining that a screensaver, that is, a program that
isn't expected to have anything to do with web surfing, could
download *anything* without asking me. Of course if I
Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to add my two cents to the discussion.
I don't think that random screensaver should download *anything* from
the Web. Not everybody has fast Internet connections, and I don't want
my computer to waste bandwidth unless *I* tell it to.
You enabled
Philip Hands wrote:
I believe you've missed the point.
As I understand it, the Random option does exactly what it says, it starts
one of the named screensavers at random. The problem is that some of the
screensavers work by taking an image, and then manipulating it in various
ways. That's
On 06/09/05 13:46:38, Philip Hands wrote:
I believe you've missed the point.
It's not that random goes of hunting for porn and slapping it on
your screen, it's that certain offensive images may end up being
downloaded, and then displayed to people who would prefer not to
see them.
I
R. Armiento wrote:
4. Start kde control-center and select 'random screensaver'
(not default)
Would you like a label on that random screensaver option which
says Warning: may do things you don't expect?
Have you read Don't eat this book? Have you had sneaker mints?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento wrote:
4. Start kde control-center and select 'random screensaver'
(not default)
Would you like a label on that random screensaver option which
says Warning: may do things you don't expect?
Have you read Don't eat this book? Have you had sneaker mints?
No,
R. Armiento wrote:
As an alternative, I present to you this highly on-topic excerpt from
Monty Python's The Crunchy Frog Sketch:
Exactly! Read the whole sketch!
[...] I suggest that the long-term solution is to move WebCollage to a
package xscreensaver-off; [...]
Nothing in webcollage
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 09:05:41AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento wrote:
Of the perhaps ~60 users I have helped over time, it is my impression
that wallpaper and screensaver are among the most common things for
ordinary users to configure. The random screensaver is a very common
The public won't blame the sysadmin they'll blame the big red swirl.
I've never heard anybody blame the logo for offending them.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
R. Armiento wrote:
Of the perhaps ~60 users I have helped over time, it is my impression
that wallpaper and screensaver are among the most common things for
ordinary users to configure. The random screensaver is a very common
choice.
Please, educate users to expect activating controls
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 11:36:28AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
This needs to be fixed for sarge, as it will subject random underage people
sitting in the same room your computer is in to random porn. I believe th=
is is illegal in most countries, and we can't be allowed to let
Hi Ean,
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 11:43:20AM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote:
This all seems a little foolish. If you want to insure that users do not
accidentally stumble across porn the only reasonable solution is to block
access to the Internet itself. WebCollage does precisely what it claims
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 06:02:54PM +0200, R. Armiento wrote:
Result: users of KDE with the 'random screensaver' setting
eventually find their screens filled with sexually explicit
content. And even if that should be fixed, users flipping
through the screensavers risk being presented with
Ean Schuessler wrote:
R. Armiento wrote:
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)
Steve Langasek wrote:
- KDE is not the default desktop in sarge, even when installing the desktop
task
- Random is not the default screensaver choice in KDE (AIUI)
Agreed with these reasons.
- The objectionable content is *not* shipped as part of Debian
- Plenty of other content Debian
Sven Luther wrote:
So, we will ship a sarge release which will show porn to our kids by default ?
I don't want *ANYTHING* to do with that, and if you go this way, i hereby
demand that my name is removed from any file containing it on this
pornographic sarge release.
Err... if I have followed
It might be interesting for you to know that this screensaver in
question is enabled by the random kde screensaver in RedHat Enterprise
Linux too. I haven't seen any outcries against redhat because of it,
and thus suspect the danger of bad press appearing because of this to
be very limited.
--
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 09:09:27AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
It might be interesting for you to know that this screensaver in
question is enabled by the random kde screensaver in RedHat Enterprise
Linux too. I haven't seen any outcries against redhat because of it,
and thus suspect
[Sven Luther]
I doubt that very many redhat entreprise users install it at home or
schools though.
I don't. :)
Here at the University, we have a license for home users as well.
But if it is so in RHEL, I am pretty sure it is so in Fedora as well.
And perhaps you can believe that Fedora is
Sven Luther wrote:
This needs to be fixed for sarge, as it will subject random underage people
sitting in the same room your computer is in to random porn. I believe th=
is is illegal in most countries, and we can't be allowed to let this happen.
Mmmm, debian-illegal anyone? What law is that
Tapio Lehtonen wrote:
I don't understand the animosity, this definitely is a bug and should
be fixed. Personally, I would even consider it grounds for postponing
release of Sarge until this is fixed.
Not if we don't annulate the woody release and fix it in woody as well.
It's rediculous that
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 11:46:43AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
On 10311 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
Do we really want to be responsible for that ? I don't want to, and i
suggest
all distributors boycott the sarge release if this is not fixed ASAP.
Oh man, cant you get a live?
Even
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:38:50PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Tapio Lehtonen wrote:
I don't understand the animosity, this definitely is a bug and should
be fixed. Personally, I would even consider it grounds for postponing
release of Sarge until this is fixed.
Not if we don't
On Sunday 05 June 2005 12:36, MJ Ray wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
This needs to be fixed for sarge, as it will subject random underage
people sitting in the same room your computer is in to random porn. I
believe th= is is illegal in most countries, and we can't be allowed to
let this
Sven Luther wrote:
Not if we don't annulate the woody release and fix it in woody as well.
It's rediculous that a bug that is present in woody already which was
released nearly three years ago, suddenly is considered a valid release
blocker for sarge less than one week before it's
Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 11:36:28AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
This needs to be fixed for sarge, as it will subject random underage
people
sitting in the same room your computer is in to random porn. I believe th=
is is illegal in most countries, and
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Mark, not everyone who criticises Debian is attempting to destroy us.
Basic politeness like using someone's chosen name escapes Matthew
Garrett. He's also arguing against something he made up. Cool.
Basic politeness like using the
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, we will ship a sarge release which will show porn to our kids by default ?
Using a non-default desktop with a non-default screensaver configuration
will, under certain circumstances, potentially result in children being
able to see pornography. So, uh,
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:54:11PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 11:32:55AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
My reasoning is roughly:
1. how much of a problem is WebCollage? (10% porn finds. ow)
even 1 is too much in the family, school, whatever case.
Depends on
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 01:20:08PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, we will ship a sarge release which will show porn to our kids by
default ?
Using a non-default desktop with a non-default screensaver configuration
will, under certain
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 01:49:54PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Not if we don't annulate the woody release and fix it in woody as well.
It's rediculous that a bug that is present in woody already which was
released nearly three years ago, suddenly is considered a
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050605 15:20]:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 01:49:54PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Not if we don't annulate the woody release and fix it in woody as well.
It's rediculous that a bug that is present in woody already which was
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050605 10:54]:
So, we will ship a sarge release which will show porn to our kids by default ?
That is not true. By default, KDE is not used. And even with using KDE,
by default the random screen saver is not selected.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 03:12:55PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:54:11PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Depends on the family. Mine doesn't even lock the porno channels
on the TV AFAICR. There's nudity in quite a lot of the adverts on
some channels, too. We watch who's
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Basic politeness like using the second person when you're replying to
someone? Christ.
Personal messages should not be sent to lists. It's like putting a
letter to me in the press or making this a Problems with MJ Ray
thread. Rather irritating.
I have better things to
This one time, at band camp, Sven Luther said:
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 05:47:50PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote:
Yeah, random underage people in this context being the children of the KDE
desktop using users. Would you like your child to be subject to porn while you
are away and the screensaver
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 08:20:07PM +0200, R. Armiento wrote:
Since the main issue on my mind was do people feel that it is ok that
this goes into the sarge release?, exactly what would have been proper
procedure? How long should I have waited before bringing it to the list?
I'd only have
Andreas Barth wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050605 15:20]:
Notice that nobody was taking this seriously, people where only saying, how it
is not so important, there is an easy workaround, let's just forget about
this.
I can assure you, that is not true. We had some discussion
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 11:22:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Is R Armiento trolling and trying to block release?
I can only wonder at the motives.
It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
The timing is (to say the least) unfortunate but that needn't be
malicious.
--
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
R. Armiento wrote: [...]
You asked to get a collage of web images. Most of the web is porn
sites. Therefor, you asked for porn. Feature, not bug, if you ask me.
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
Mark Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 11:22:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Is R Armiento trolling and trying to block release?
I can only wonder at the motives.
It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
As a bug. It's not reasonable to bring it here the next day.
[Disclaimer: I'm not a DD]
On Saturday 04 June 2005 17:07, MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento wrote: [...]
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.
What justification for
Christian Kaenzig wrote:
On Saturday 04 June 2005 17:07, MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento wrote: [...]
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.
What justification for
On Saturday 04 June 2005 08:07 am, MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento wrote: [...]
You asked to get a collage of web images. Most of the web is porn
sites. Therefor, you asked for porn. Feature, not bug, if you ask me.
You miss the point that no one really asked for this collage of web
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 03:48:22PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
As a bug. It's not reasonable to bring it here the next day.
No, but not quite so obviously malicious as you seem to feel either.
--
You grabbed
Daniel Burrows wrote:
I don't know what's in the 'default' install, but kde is part of the=20
desktop task, which I'd expect a lot of users will use to install desktop=
systems.
This surprised me, so I went looking. The desktop task seems
to contain gnome, kde and no other desktops. That's
* R. Armiento [Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:02:54 +0200]:
I just want to bring bug #311683 to public awareness and
discussion. Since it is a bit of a sociopolitcal and policy
issue, I suspect there may be people out there who feel
strongly about this one way or the other, and with
the upcoming
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:35:35 +0100
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel Burrows wrote:
I don't know what's in the 'default' install, but kde is part of the=20
desktop task, which I'd expect a lot of users will use to install desktop=
systems.
This surprised me, so I went looking.
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= wrote:
I'd hope to see kdedesktop, gnomedesktop and officeapps tasks,
or pick just one desktop. Oh well.
=20
Please file a bug against tasksel, if it bothers one enough. I
I already did, some time ago:
http://bugs.debian.org/286986
I don't understand
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:04:19 +0100
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= wrote:
I'd hope to see kdedesktop, gnomedesktop and officeapps tasks,
or pick just one desktop. Oh well.
=20
Please file a bug against tasksel, if it bothers one enough. I
I already
Mark Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 03:48:22PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
As a bug. It's not reasonable to bring it here the next day.
No, but not quite so obviously malicious as you seem to feel
Adeodato Simó wrote:
* R. Armiento [Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:02:54 +0200]:
I just want to bring bug #311683 to public awareness and
discussion.
1. This is not getting fixed for Sarge, it has been reported too late.
You may want to (try to) convince the Stable Release Manager that
this
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 07:40:46PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* R. Armiento [Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:02:54 +0200]:
I just want to bring bug #311683 to public awareness and
discussion. Since it is a bit of a sociopolitcal and policy
issue, I suspect there may be people out there who feel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I personally would feel strongly insulted if my children where to be subject
to such a thing, and i would be ashamed to propose debian/sarge to any folk i
know, so i vote for making this issue RC and fixing
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
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is R Armiento trolling and trying to block release?
I can only wonder at the motives.
I hear he's been indicted for war crimes. No, seriously, what do you
think? Is the explanation more likely to be:
a) He wants to delay Debian's release in order to avoid
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, but only those qualify for a grave bug in debian at present.
See http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities
Policy is defined by current behaviour. It is not prescriptive. As a
project, we are free to decide that this is an RC issue for whatever
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Mark, not everyone who criticises Debian is attempting to destroy us.
Basic politeness like using someone's chosen name escapes Matthew
Garrett. He's also arguing against something he made up. Cool.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Matthew Garrett wrote:
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, but only those qualify for a grave bug in debian at present.
See http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities
Policy is defined by current behaviour. It is not prescriptive. As a
project, we are free to decide that this is
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 08:46:48PM +0200, R. Armiento wrote:
Adeodato Simó wrote:
* R. Armiento [Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:02:54 +0200]:
I just want to bring bug #311683 to public awareness and
discussion.
1. This is not getting fixed for Sarge, it has been reported too late.
You may want
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 10:21:09PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 06:35:35PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Daniel Burrows wrote:
I don't know what's in the 'default' install, but kde is part of the=20
desktop task, which I'd expect a lot of users will use to install
please don't start the hot-babe thread again ...
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
pgpAcvJxLFDHm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
3.06.2005 pisze R. Armiento ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
The issue is:
1. The WebCollage screensaver ...makes collages out of
random images pulled off of the World Wide Web. It finds
these images by doing random web searches The result is
a screensaver that often shows sexually explicit images.
MJ Ray wrote:
R. Armiento [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just want to bring bug #311683 to public awareness and
You reported it yesterday. Why bounce it so soon?
I discovered and reported it yesterday. My personal feelings about the
issue isn't that strong, and apparently neither is the
This one time, at band camp, R. Armiento said:
The issue is:
1. The WebCollage screensaver ...makes collages out of
random images pulled off of the World Wide Web. It finds
these images by doing random web searches The result is
a screensaver that often shows sexually explicit images.
So
66 matches
Mail list logo
