Astronomy / Space NASA changing names of planets and other heavenly bodies.
- Status
![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
No. Because I stated in my first response that I don’t find the terms offensive to me personally.
I merely acknowledged that others might.
As opposed to belligerently using a term that someone finds offensive? If you say so.
ok boomer.
Inuit Nebula sounds fine to me.
Widespread censorship over what someone somewhere finds offensive? Yeah, that's dangerous. You're giving people a hell of a lot of power. Especially coupled with absurd hate speech laws.
Absurd to you. Your opinion.
Deleted member 257907
D
I think maybe NASA need to virtue signal because of what happened after ww2 and who they employed then.
So you merely acknowledge that others might find the term "goat" offensive, right? So if I were to use that word to describe an animal on a farm, completely not intending to insult anyone, would you call me out for using it because can also be used as an offensive word and therefore someone may get offended?
Deleted member 257907
D
Here's one from last year
www.nytimes.com
NASA Renames Object After Uproar Over Old Name’s Nazi Connotations (Published 2019)
Scientists said an object four billion miles from Earth would be given a Native American name: Arrokoth. Its previous, informal name, Ultima Thule, had links to the Third Reich.
Blissfully unaware of the modern world and parlance. BlessCan't even get that right. You're doing well.
Oh, I forgot...
OK boomer - Wikipedia
Will it still be acceptable to refer to:
Black Holes .... Brown Dwarfs .... White Dwarfs ?
This nomenclature nonsense could have no end
Black Holes .... Brown Dwarfs .... White Dwarfs ?
This nomenclature nonsense could have no end
Deleted member 257907
D
Will it still be acceptable to refer to:
Black Holes .... Brown Dwarfs .... White Dwarfs ?
This nomenclature nonsense could have no end
isn't dwarf considered a slur already or does it depend on how u use it?
No, obviously not, here's why, there is a distinction.
If you use the term Goat, I would not call you out for using the term, even if you called someone a goat as an insult, I wouldn't call you out until the point that they find it offensive. So you and I are in a pub, you call an old lady a goat and she doesn't like it, I might call you out on it if you continue to use the term, to her, to upset her.
I'm not in the business of censoring anyone because it 'might' cause offence. I'm not even in the business of censoring people, I just don't get the mindset that if someone finds a term offensive, they have said so, why anyone continues to use it, belligerently, because to not use it offends their own sensibilities. They both just look like people offended by words to me, both sides.
Me? I have no terms that upset me personally, I've been insulted by experts. I'm not everyone.
Last edited:
Deleted member 257907
D
I am putting a spoiler here so no one gets offended without a warning:
This is getting out of hand and will not end until the ones doing the cancel culture are regulated, legislated and reprimanded for disturbing behavior.
Yes, renaming things for OTHER people because YOU feel offended is disturbing.
We can still have a dialectic discussion about specific naming conventions. But to flat out cancel stuff and changing names just because you are in power, is wrong.
Not only will it not end well. It will not end. It will get even worse when global artificial intelligence officials decide what to do based on code written by specific individual agendas. What if the entity deciding this feel offended by the existence of humans?
The people and organisations doing these cancel culture thingies need to be monitored, registered, analyzed and regulated by a non-political, non-human entity. It will never be possible to regulate this as a human being. (Unless as an elected authoritarian i.e. dictator (which in turn cancel culture is) ).
Where are the third party aliens when we need them...
If you want to cancel culture, it should only be cancelled for your own experience and not for everyone.
When legislation and officials are incompetent children.
This is getting out of hand and will not end until the ones doing the cancel culture are regulated, legislated and reprimanded for disturbing behavior.
Yes, renaming things for OTHER people because YOU feel offended is disturbing.
We can still have a dialectic discussion about specific naming conventions. But to flat out cancel stuff and changing names just because you are in power, is wrong.
Not only will it not end well. It will not end. It will get even worse when global artificial intelligence officials decide what to do based on code written by specific individual agendas. What if the entity deciding this feel offended by the existence of humans?
The people and organisations doing these cancel culture thingies need to be monitored, registered, analyzed and regulated by a non-political, non-human entity. It will never be possible to regulate this as a human being. (Unless as an elected authoritarian i.e. dictator (which in turn cancel culture is) ).
Where are the third party aliens when we need them...
The analogue non-human computer power of fungi may prove to be that entity we need. And it has been here on Earth for atleast 3.4 billion years. Time to communicate. Let fungi decide what to do.
I can already see a vision of a solution before me: extended filter bubbles. What you can not see, you may not feel the urge to cancel. Put a filter bubble around the cancel culture entities and they will no longer cancel stuff.
"WARNING: This content is not according to your ethical standards. Therefore this content is restricted. You will not be able to experience this content unless you change your ethical standards in the forms. Have a nice day!"
"WARNING: The named place on Earth you are looking for is restricted. Change your ethical standards in the forms to gain access to this restricted material."
I can already see a vision of a solution before me: extended filter bubbles. What you can not see, you may not feel the urge to cancel. Put a filter bubble around the cancel culture entities and they will no longer cancel stuff.
"WARNING: This content is not according to your ethical standards. Therefore this content is restricted. You will not be able to experience this content unless you change your ethical standards in the forms. Have a nice day!"
"WARNING: The named place on Earth you are looking for is restricted. Change your ethical standards in the forms to gain access to this restricted material."
If you want to cancel culture, it should only be cancelled for your own experience and not for everyone.
Last edited:
![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
I myself prefer to use the term Dawi but wont hold any grudge whatsoever.
As I said. You can't even get that right.
But say I was talking to the lady and calling her a goat and she wasn't getting offended. Suddenly another lady appears out of nowhere and starts calling me out for saying "goat" even though that word wasn't directed at her at all and it was also not meant as an insult. She has no reason to be offended because I am not calling her a goat and I am also not using goat as an insult.
The same situation is described in the OP. NASA is calling a certain astronomical body a name - the body obviously doesn't mind being called that, that name is not meant as an insult and it is not directed at any person or group of people, only at the body. Therefore people who are offended have no reason to be offended.
- Status