Fox News, the unmitigated authority in open source technology, gave its viewers the gift of knowledge yesterday with its explanation of GitHub. Thanks Fox News!
So, what’s the problem? Well, that’s simple. It seems that Fox News’ technology department –run by a motley crew of half-witted quick-study-types– failed to explain GitHub, and also disregarded both spelling and punctuation in favor of adopting what I would describe as a rogue journalistic style; a style that exists far beyond the confines of traditional English language rules. It is now with great pleasure that I flog the holy-hell out of the following screen capture in an attempt to make them cry.
Let’s have a look.
Figure 1: “THE GITHUB DICTIONARY”
Who exactly are you quoting here? Is one of your sources a person who refers to a collection of GitHub terms as “THE GITHUB DICTIONARY”? Is so, then OK — but is it even necessary to quote someone here? Why not just have a heading that simply reads: The GitHub Dictionary. Under which, it would be perfectly valid for you to list the GitHub terms that you believe would be most valuable to your viewers.
Figure 2: reposotory
As if this blurb of non-sense couldn’t get any more inconsistent, the word repository has been misspelled. Though oddly enough, immediately following the misspelling is a perfect and proper usage of single quotes! Using ‘repos’ in single quotes is a great way to indirectly quote GitHub users who often use the word in this very way.
Figure 3: “Forked”
Again, the inconsistency deployed upon this newscast by Fox News is equal parts alarming and abhorrent. They’ve decided to use “Forked”, as if to quote someone directly. Single quotes would have worked better in this case and would have arrived much closer towards coherent English. No quotes at all would have been perfectly acceptable as well. Unfortunately, the error here is far more severe. Fox News, who apparently exists far outside of the realm of Google and Wikipedia, were unable to arrive at the definition of “Forked”. Instead, they simply made it up… Let’s compare Fox news definition of “Forked” to Wikipedia’s. Do they align with one another? We’ll let you be the judge.
Fox’ definition: “the term for code editing”
Wikipedia: In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a copy of source code from one software package and start independent development on it, creating a distinct piece of software. The term often implies not merely a development branch, but a split in the developer community, a form of schism.
Free and open-source software is that which, by definition, may be forked from the original development team without prior permission without violating any copyright law. However, licensed forks of proprietary software (e.g. Unix) also happen.
Figure 4: “pull request”
Honestly, I’m too exhausted to continue nit-picking on Fox’s inability to deliver coherent English to their drone-army viewer-ship. Instead, let’s just compare definitions again. This time, we’ll compare Fox News rough envisage to the definition as it appears on GitHub.
Fox News: e-note sent to the original code writer requesting edit rights.
GitHub: Pull requests let you tell others about changes you’ve pushed to a GitHub repository. Once a pull request is sent, interested parties can review the set of changes, discuss potential modifications, and even push follow-up commits if necessary.
All I can say is, “don’t you eat that yellow snow” people.
Nanook Rubs It — Frank Zappa
Well, right about that time people
A fur-trapper (who was strictly from commercial)
Had the unmitigated audacity to jump up from behind my igloo (peekaboo) )
And he started into whippin’ on my favorite baby seal
With a lead-filled snowshoe