I'm not condoning firing as a response - that's as thoughtless and unimaginative as the name. And perhaps the name isn't even if reason for it - that doesn't seem to be clear. But come on guys, try to stay classy.
How far do you take this word-association game?
I note that the US represents itself using the image of an eagle. So did the Roman Empire, and later the Nazi party. Should everyone be uncomfortable with America over that?
....really? That seems like an incredible stretch.
> I'm not condoning firing as a response - that's as thoughtless and unimaginative as the name. And perhaps the name isn't even if reason for it
The article and the surrounding discussion makes it super, super clear that it's nothing to do with the name at all.
To be fair, I think it's more common for security projects to take on more aloof names. Who could forget "John The Ripper" or "back orfice" from the cult of the dead cow? I'm sure there are many more ..
True, although I also find the negative sides of "hacker culture" more pervasive and less challenged than "brogrammer" culture or whatever term you want to use.
> Why all this morality police?
I find it overly sexualised, from a very masculine perspective. That's not really appropriate in a professional context in my opinion, but more than that, it can really put some people off the industry. Unfortunately, those people it puts off are disproportionately from groups that are already minorities in the industry, and so it helps in some small way, to perpetuate the lack of diversity.
Obviously this particular example really is only a small part of the problem, but it all contributes, and one of the easiest ways to do our part for increasing diversity and making the industry more welcoming is to do things like improve the naming of our projects.