@ConorMancone I would go another angle: Dump the data of 100 customers and e-mail it to them. Tell them that anyone else could gain access to this data, and that you are trying to help them, but the next person who discovers this vulnerability may not have such good intentions

wow...

I have missed something in the last two weeks

@TomK. Oh boy...

@MechMK1 Yeah, the trouble is that in the US what you just described is a clear violation of the Fraud and Abuse act, and can land me in jail for an extended period of time. Otherwise, my actions thus far are not in the least bit questionable/illegal - I just visited a few completely public API endpoint, and have taken no actions to access data I shouldn't

@TomK. Welcome back Tom. Yes, yes you have :)

@ConorMancone I would still say just yeet it on twitter. It's the only way to force a company to make a move

so.. does this site have any mods left? <:

@TomK. Schroeder seemed to be around, doing his mod thing yesterday.

He was definitely unhappy though, and had previously stated that he was going to take a pause from his duties for some unspecified period of time

Yup. And Jeff too

mhk, I get it though. It really sucks, if you can't be sure how your e̶v̶i̶l̶ overlords react after you take any action

My opinion is simple: Stack Exchange should be apolitical.

A place where questions can be asked, without expecting any kind of bias to one side or the other.

I think that who I am as a person only matters in very few Stack Exchange sites, such as The Workplace or Interpersonal Skills.

"I feel like my co-workers avoid me because I am trans. What can I do?" is a legitimate question. "How can a trans person prevent XSS?" is weird and makes me wonder why it was phrased that way.

Even if you look here at Sec.SE, who you are doesn't matter. Sometimes, specific parts matter, such as "I live in an oppressive regime that intercepts my communication. How can I keep some form of privacy?"

But I cannot think of a single question, that would be on-topic here, that would include one's gender, self-identification or sexuality.

uh.. what?

I don't really understand what this has to do with "(a)political"

@TomK. The new Code-of-Conduct hit

As you can see by -1238 votes, it was not well received

Stack Exchange, Inc. is pushing more politics onto the platform, taking a very open left-wing stance, that many users disagree with

My own political views aside, I think this is a move in the completely wrong direction.

I still don't really see how this has anything to do with politics or policy

if I tell you, my name is Klaus

and you say "Hi Peter"

wouldn't this be considered rude?

@TomK. The politics begin with Q11:

> Q11: If I’m uncomfortable with a particular pronoun, can I just avoid using it?

> We are asking everyone to use all stated pronouns as you would naturally write. Explicitly avoiding using someone’s pronouns because you are uncomfortable is a way of refusing to recognize their identity and is a violation of the Code of Conduct.

Okay Mech0rpsMK30

My point being is that if you ask me to use any form of neo-pronouns and I just write my response to avoid all pronouns, like I am doing right now, I am violating the CoC.

Monica was fired for daring to question the CoC, then was publicly slandered as a bigot

And when I say question, I literally mean "Asking questions regarding the CoC"

still, this has nothing to do with politics, but with being pedantic over the CoC. You want to never use pronouns again? Fine by me.

I read Monica's statement, sounded reasonable to me

but what you cited doesn't say "YOU HAVE TO USE THE PRONOUN I WANT!"

@TomK. Fine by you, but not the code of conduct! That's the point!

@TomK. Q9: Do I have to use pronouns I’m unfamiliar or uncomfortable with (e.g., neopronouns like xe, zir, ne... )?

> Yes, if those are stated by the individual.

so? just use them

still, no politics involved

It is very much politics, because I disagree with the idea that people can be anything other than men or women. It's a fundamental belief in the natural order of things that I hold.

How does the usage of a pronoun make you feel uncomfortable?

As I just mentioned, it opposes my beliefs.

You do know there is a difference between beliefs and facts?

What, in this case, is a fact for you then?

Do I become a woman by claiming to be one? By wanting to be one?

How do you know that you have the gender that you believe to have?

People just know.

Some people need a while to figure it out

By looking down my pants and seeing my genitals there.

Interesting, how do you know which genital belongs to which gender?

There is no "belonging", as if genitals and gender are separate things

Fortunately it does not

Forgive me, English is not my mother tongue. There may be a better word to phrase that sentence

Maybe 'constitute'

So?

This is the answer to your question. If you have an XY chromosome, you have a penis and you are male. If you have an XX chromosome, you have a vagina and you are a woman.

There is no FK chromosome pair that results in a genitals formed like a boat

This is not about chromosomes, this is about gender. :)

There's a whole branch of science that is called gender studies which you are denouncing with your very non-educated belief.

Chromosomes define genitals, genitals define gender.

How do you come to that conclusion?

There are a lot professors who think otherwise.

@TomK. I find the usage of "non-educated" to be a bit of a slight put-down, just because I disagree with it. I consider "gender studies" to be pseudo-science

@TomK. There are also a lot of professors who think exactly like me, though it doesn't matter. Truth can't be changed by a popularity vote

Considering gender studies to be pseudo science is, frankly, more than non-educated. It is challenging the idea of scientific discourse.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Do you know how many professorships there are in the US or in Europe?

One can criticize a field of science without being opposed to science or the idea of scientific discourse.

@TomK. In what way is this relevant?

name me one more field of science that you criticize as a whole that has as many professorships as gender science in the developed world.

or rather that you'd name a "pseudo science"

@MechMK1 because professorships and money within the scientific community are (mostly) given out based on scientific discourse.

None. And the question makes me think that you didn't understand the point that I am making. I feel as if you are trying to label me as a person who rejects science as a whole. I am not.

@TomK. I disagree, at least on the monetary part. Money is invested in whatever the investors consider the most promising.

This is the reason why there is so little money for confirmation studies. Investors consider them "second-grade", as they don't provide "new" knowledge - forgetting in turn how important it is to independently verify (or disprove) scientific results.

I'm not trying to label you as anything. I'm trying to make you understand that gender studies is a real science. Denouncing it as a pseudo science shows, that you do not understand the process that is behind the scientific discourse that is had within the scientific community

I believe it to be agenda-driven, as opposed to scientific fields such as Information Theory or Graph Theory.

Why do I try that? Because maybe then you'll understand, that your point "sex = gender" and "penis = male" is a very simplistic view, that has been abandonded decades ago within the scientific community.

@TomK. Again, I disagree. There exists much criticism of gender studies, and to paint "the scientific community" as one homogenous blob, with one specific opinion, is outright wrong.

You can believe that, but as someone who has seen the scientific community from within: there's no evil cabal, there is no conspiracy, there is no one big agenda.

I find it interesting that you describe yourself as someone "who has seen the scientific community from within", as if that would not also apply to me.

Secondly, I never claimed that there was "a great conspiracy".

I said I believe that the field of gender studies is politically motivated, which is why I cannot consider it to be the same kind of scientific field akin to Math or Engineering.

A duck stays a duck, no matter how much it wants to be a dog. No matter how much you want it to be a dog. No matter how much anyone in the world wants it to be a dog.

And with that being said, I'm off for today. I need to finish my report in the next 90 minutes.

See you all again, and have a nice day.

@ConorMancone I never said they are completely unimportant. But I say - as do many others - that they are not the only factor in contributing to your gender identity.

@MechMK1 I find it interesting, how you see this baked into this comment ;)

@MechMK1 Do you have any proof for this claim?

@ConorMancone And Conor, I'm sorry, I like you, please but don't be that person. Don't say "I don't want to jump in here" and do it anyway... If you want to say something, just say it. But this kind of "polite heckling" is just annoying..

@TomK. That's fair. Unfortunately it seems I can no longer delete my comment.

I can make peace with that.

You know, what I really don't get? What all the fuzz is about. Everybody with their fucking beliefs... If people want to be called names and things you didn't expect. Why don't just do it?

I have removed them on request. Have a good day everyone.

Whoa.

Quite the big guns ;)

I appreciate the effort @ConorMancone (bow)

and also: thanks mods

@TomK. The fuss doesn't surprise me at all. This is a very contentious topic, and SE has decided to jump right into the deep end of it and take a strong, unconditional, and controversial stance. It's a big change in their view. Before, it was "If you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all", which is a pretty reasonable viewpoint that allows people with diverse opinions to get along in a neutral forum.

Now the stance is "If you can't explicitly state your agreement with this controversial viewpoint, then you aren't welcome here". It's a gigantic change in stance, and it doesn't surprise me at all that it has caused so much controversy

(although for more background, their change of licensing agreement has also caused an equally large amount of fuss)

In essence, this is no longer a neutral forum. It's now a forum with a strong political opinion, which asks you to agree and leave. For a company that has been pushing to be more open and accepting, it seems like a very crazy stance to take

It's also a strong departure from how the site normally works. Previously it was about questions and answers. If someone had put a signature in their question, or started with "Hi, [name] here!" the correct step was always to edit it out. Now though if someone leads with "My preferred pronouns are [pronouns]" then it is specifically supposed to be left in.

Having now seen a question or two like that, it is quite jarring on a site that was never supposed to be about the question-er or answer-er in the first place.

correction: which asks you to agree or leave

The whole thing was just screwed up very badly, and people on both sides exaggerate greatly. Some opposed say they'll need to tape a list of neopronouns to their screen to be able to use SE, which is a bit ridiculous.

On the other hand, SE demodded Monica supposedly just for asking clarifying questions, so loads of people are very uneasy about how the CoC will be enforced in practice, even if they're fine with the CoC itself, and this is just made that much worse by the tone of the FAQ.

Compare the official FAQ with this one, which do you think is gonna go over better with someone who is skeptical of the whole thing?

And it's far too easy to get the impression that SE thinks anyone who disagrees with them is just a bigot, which is soooo unhelpful.

That second one is actually quite reasonable. I don't think I have any disagreements with it (unlike the actual FAQ).