Linus Torvalds is Back in Charge of Linux (zdnet.com) 395
At Open Source Summit Europe in Edinburgh, Scotland, Linus Torvalds is meeting with Linux's top 40 or so developers at the Maintainers' Summit. This is his first step back in taking over Linux's reins. From a report: A little over a month ago, Torvalds stepped back from running the Linux development community. In a note to the Linux Kernel Mailing List (LKML), Torvalds said, "I need to change some of my behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development entirely. I am going to take time off and get some assistance on how to understand people's emotions and respond appropriately." That time is over. Torvalds is back.
Whether he'll be a kinder and gentler Torvalds remains to be seen. In the Linux 4.19 announcement, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Linux's temporary leader and maintainer of the stable branch, wrote: "Linus, I'm handing the kernel tree back to you. You can have the joy of dealing with the merge window :)"
Whether he'll be a kinder and gentler Torvalds remains to be seen. In the Linux 4.19 announcement, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Linux's temporary leader and maintainer of the stable branch, wrote: "Linus, I'm handing the kernel tree back to you. You can have the joy of dealing with the merge window :)"
Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Interesting)
Step 2: Admit that he was blackmailed and fuck all that bullshit he was forced to say.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Being bluntly honest about that code does or does not live up to standard is not the problem -- just keep it professional. Just eliminate the gratuitous BS that he is known for. Also if it is not up to standard, make it constructive.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Insightful)
Also if it is not up to standard, make it constructive.
Some of the cases he called out ended up that way because constructive criticism was met with denial and deflections. In one case I remember the maintainer broke a user land API by introducing a new error code, we got to see Linus laying it in on the maintainer long **after** the maintainer dismissed Linus statements about unacceptable compatibility issues. Wether professional or not BS remains BS and in that case Linus had to tell the maintainer to quit with his BS.
Re: (Score:3)
But was laying it on them necessary, or could Linus just have said "no, this code isn't good enough, refer to my earlier email about it, patch rejected"?
Functionally there is no difference.
Re: (Score:2)
The _rudest_ thing he could have written was: 'i have revoked your access to the group! Go away.'
The flame was a last warning, Linus should have just kicked the dense coder out, but he's a softy.
I've run some projects in my day, I don't yell, I fire. If someone IS such an asshole that they MAKE me be an asshole to get their jobs done, I just get rid of them.
Re: (Score:2)
No matter how good he is -- he would have had to been fired by almost all companies out there.
And they're almost all humourless boring corporate drone houses run by HR. He should take it as a badge of honour.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how some just cannot help seeing a conspiracy at work only because a bully decides his bully ways were unprofessional, detrimental behaviour, which shouldn't be tolerated whereever people work together.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Because that kind of change doesn't happen at the flip of a switch. Either he was forced to, or he had some life changing event happen to him that caused him to rethink things. Either way, there is something bigger happening that we may never know about.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Insightful)
Doesn't require a life changing event, all it takes is insight that frequently comes with maturity. This happens literally every day and happens to everybody. It's how children become adults.
We all know many programmers exist in a state of arrested development. Not all are doomed to remain that way.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, you have to take your meds every day. Once is not enough.
Re: Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:3)
I live in a complex one. It's like a real world but it has imaginary components. if
Re: (Score:2)
and you struggle with reading comprehension, don't you?
First you call Torvalds a sociopath then you wonder out loud if he's an "asshole" and now you are flinging childish insults at others.
Keep up the yeoman's work.
Re: (Score:2)
Step 3 Name names, force the roaches that tried to pull this into the light so they don't have as easy a time with their next target.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Someone stuck a gun to his head? Look, the world is changing whether you like it or not. Linus Torvalds chose to roll with it.
What's the alternative, spouting a bunch of bullshit nonsense about leading a revolution, and watching Linux get forked, and all the Corporate types (who are 95% of the devs now) follow the Kernel with the Best Code Of Conduct?
Seriously, when faced with 'take empathy training' or 'lead the community off to the biggest flame war of all time', which did you think he was going to choos
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"Look, the world is changing whether you like it or not. Linus Torvalds chose to roll with it."
And maybe he just realized he was wrong. This happens every day, even with people who feel entitled to exhibit sociopathic behaviors.
Perhaps he realized that reducing the frequency of the root cause assumed in all 3 of your examples, "terrible code", is what is needed. Abuse and contempt don't accomplish that, better developers and a better environment do. Better judgement also does, and perhaps he realizes h
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone stuck a gun to his head? Look, the world is changing whether you like it or not. Linus Torvalds chose to roll with it.
Most people have a problem with "diversity initiatives" that look like they came out of the 1953 playbook of "fuck insert race here." This is after decades of "judge by the content of character, not by their skin" with the west moving for a more meritocratic system. And then the leftwing progressives, universities, and government policies that fell all over themselves by giving handouts, freebies, preferential hiring, slots in universities, government jobs to people who wouldn't have cut it otherwise.
There's a reason why Harvard and several other US universities are being sued for active discrimination against whites and asians.
Seriously, when faced with 'take empathy training' or 'lead the community off to the biggest flame war of all time', which did you think he was going to choose?
Easy answer, because outrage mobs have already made the choice for him. If he didn't bow, they'd start slandering him and trying to ruin him financially among others who refused to bow down. So the choice between bowing to the mob that does nothing, and the group that contributes? He made a choice hoping it would blow over.
Empathy is an interesting thing, problem is the people riding the outrage mob don't care. They don't want empathy, they want their victimization validated. Victimization as a currency is valuable, you can get pretty far on it if you're a shitty human who's done shitty things to people. Because there's an entire mob of people inside that progressive stack who will defend your actions, and go out of their way to ruin the detractors. Matt Taylor, Tim Hunt, Donglegate, take your pick among the hundreds of other cases.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most people have a problem with "diversity initiatives" that look like they came out of the 1953 playbook of "fuck insert race here."
And what does that have to do with the Linux Code of Conduct? What part of it is like a "1953 playbook of fuck insert race here"?
The real problem is snowflakes who are triggered by the mere suggestion that they shouldn't be assholes all the time (part time is fine), and then assume that it's a giant conspiracy against their race and soon they will be the ones at the back of the bus.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Informative)
> Correct. Fortunately these diversity initiatives only exist in the mad ramblings of the far right, as admitted justification to further oppress people.
Tell that to Harvard, they're in court over that.
> Funny that the only mention I can find of this is on literal fake news sites. Not a single public record has any mention of this.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jun/15/harvard-sued-discrimination-against-asian-americans [theguardian.com]
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/15/620368377/harvard-accused-of-racial-balancing-lawsuit-says-asian-americans-treated-unfairl [npr.org]
If you want to call those "literal fake news sites," it's a free country ... :)
Guess I'd better use DuckDuckGo to dig up public records for this and an earlier lawsuit:
http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/SFFA-v.-Harvard-Complaint.pdf [netdna-ssl.com]
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-981 [cornell.edu]
> It's well known that conservatives only allow others that believe math and science and reading comprehension are all liberal conspiracies.
Most relevant to this, here's Linus' daughter, signing the post-meritocracy manifesto [reddit.com]. So instead of building the best Linux for the benefit of everyone, we should worry more about politics.
Here's a liberal trying to decolonize science [youtube.com] so we can get rid of the racism, in which they're saying things like "through black magic" people can send lightning to strike someone and then asking "can you explain that scientifically?" Is this part of that magical liberal bias in reality? :)
CNN has declared that "math is racist" [cnn.com] (archive [archive.is]).
In general, a lot of this nonsense traces back to the ideas of critical theory [wikipedia.org]. There are groups who think that every wrong in the world traces back to bad power structures which they need to deconstruct and recreate to achieve fairness. It should tell you something when they're currently trying to deconstruct things like science and meritocracy, though...
The irony is that none of that is necessary and it's actively harmful to the supposed goals. It's true that bad luck, oppression, disasters, etc. unfairly keep some people down or prop others up. The right way to fix that would be to help all disadvantaged people equally. Insofar as certain groups have been historically kept down as such, this would disproportionately help them and right things over time. Instead, it's more fashionable to decide that help must be on the basis of group membership, which instead creates new competition among groups and animosity.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Interesting)
People who are so thinned skinned they get upset about any of your examples (outside of being disappointed in themselves for producing a poor result) are the ones who need training. They have problems with emotional stability.
"Linus will probably fall back to somplece between #1 and #3. And if you don't think thats a choice, you don't understand what that word means and have never had your family threatened by other people for what you SHOULD say."
SJW are threatening you and and your family for what they think you SHOULD say. Do you want to talk about actual emotional trauma, how about walking around terrified under constant threat of having your name and family being equated to the most genocidal monsters in human history? Every moment of every day any minor slip of SOMEONE ELSES inner thoughts and whimsical feelings potentially able to destroy your career and ability to provide for your family.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Insightful)
There is nothing constructive about walking on eggshells.
Straw man. Nobody suggested walking on eggshells. They suggested being professional and courteous. If you can't express yourself while being those things, the problem is you and your inadequate vocabulary.
People should take ownership of their own feelings. Feelings are valid, in the sense you feel them, it doesn't mean they are reasonable, appropriate, or fair.
Yes, that's right. That's why it's not appropriate for Linus to let his feelings run away with him, and cause him to abuse people unnecessarily.
SJW are threatening you and and your family for what they think you SHOULD say.
[citation needed]
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Insightful)
Having to stop and expend effort on avoiding offense rather than putting your thought on the actual message your communication is meant to convey, particularly because of fear of social outcry and your words being twisted, is walking on eggshells. To suggest anything that amounts to that, is walking on eggshells. You achieve a far more professional and tolerant result by applying the principle of philosophical charity to the speaker than rescinding it and demanding the speaker cater to unknown, changing, conflicting, and fickle sensitivities of the audience. Note, I'm not defining which speaker, what message, or what audience. The logical principle is sound agnostic of those considerations.
You can extract value from logically sound arguments whether the speaker is biased or not. If the speaker is biased the result of applying philosophical charity will be to transform their invalid argument into a stronger and more valid one which does have merit. In this manner you do not need to fear the quality, merit, or agenda of the speaker because their argument carries it's own merits or lack thereof.
"Yes, that's right. That's why it's not appropriate for Linus to let his feelings run away with him, and cause him to abuse people unnecessarily."
Which is something for Linus to evaluate, judge, and decide for himself via self-analysis. For all the negativity applied to the idea of a double standard, the best result comes from a double standard wherein you apply logical charity and forgiveness to others and forgiveness alongside internal correction and analysis to oneself. It is not my or your place to correct or judge Linus' feelings, acting in a logical manner requires considering the validity of what is spoken not the speaker.
"[citation needed]"
Please refer to your own post here which is nowhere near as extreme but likely a good example of the concept with good intention:
"That's why it's not appropriate for Linus to let his feelings run away with him"
The question is not whether that is appropriate. In most cases I am not proud of letting my feelings run away with me as you'd say. But that is a judgement for Linus to make in self-analysis about whether he feels that is what he is doing. If we apply philosophical charity to his arguments the responses will contrast and highlight that to him because they will inherit the logical strengths of his perspective. If we instead apply judgement of him that only blinds us to the logical merit that came alongside any inappropriate sentiment he expressed alongside making him feel defensive and attacked making him lose face and more angry. Even worse, we might be wrong and he may simply have been ambivalent or ignorant of sensitivities and passionate about his point.
If enough people pass judgement like you have it undermines his ability to lead a technical project even if he is the best technical person to do so. It attacks his reputation and weakens his character. Further it makes it more challenging for him to grow and develop his character. This threatens his career and his family. It also threatens the entire project.
The group of roles for which it is more important what social values they represent than how well they function in their role is extremely slim. It feels like people are forgetting that and blurring the lines.
Re: (Score:3)
Straw man. Nobody suggested walking on eggshells. They suggested being professional and courteous. If you can't express yourself while being those things, the problem is you and your inadequate vocabulary.
So what if it is? Then what?
Lets assume everyone agrees 'Villager A' is a mean nasty person who makes everyone "feel" bad. 'Villager A' is simply incapable of being professional or courteous without "pretending" and even then he sucks at it.
Does this mean 'Villager A' has no place and is not welcomed to participate in society? 'Villager A' is not allowed to have a job (everyone knows what he said, Internet never forgets) or contribute to an open source project just because everyone else doesn't like mean
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Have you actually read a code of conduct? It's not "walking on eggshells", it's "be a decent, professional human being".
Let's look at the Linux one you're so upset about. What does it prohibit?
* Sexualized language, imagery, and unwelcome advances
* Trolling
* Insults and personal attacks
* Harassment
* Doxing
* "Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting"
What are the consequences? Not being allowed to contribute to the codebase. That's it. You can still access the
Re: (Score:3)
* Sexualized language, imagery, and unwelcome advances
* Trolling
* Insults and personal attacks
* Harassment
* Doxing
* "Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting""
I think you'll find the issue is less about the rules than the interpretation. Also, not one of those things is about ability to perform.
"Linux might not be a for-profit business, but it's a large enough, and important enough, pr
Re: (Score:2)
The interpretation, in this case, is ultimately up to Linus. The guy who is notoriously blunt and unwilling to put up with bullshit. Your drivers suck? Fuck you, fix it. You broke userspace? Fuck you, fix it. Yeah, I'm having a real hard time imagining him kicking someone off the kernel team because they didn't properly conjugate some personal pronoun invented two weeks ago.
Humans, and human society, do not work well with absolute, precise rules. That's why even our actual laws are subject to the interpreta
Re: (Score:3)
If your code is amazing you'll get rejected or never even seen under this new policy because someone found the dancing hola girl in your sig offensive. Rejecting someone's patches for reasons that aren't contained in the patch lowers the quality of the result. Rejecting and silencing those who produce the best code does so on a
Re: (Score:3)
Linus referenced it in his own statement. Linus Torvalds constitutes one of the most credible witnesses on the planet. He might be a jerk but his credibility certainly isn't in question.
Re: (Score:2)
He did not reference being threatened by SJWs. Please provide a link to the statement in question and quote the part where he makes this claim.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Informative)
"Instead of a 'common goal', you end up with horrible fighting between different 'in-groups'. It's very polarising, and both sides love egging the other side on. It's not even a 'discussion', it's just people shouting at each other. That's actually the reason I for the longest time did not want to be involved with the whole CoC discussion in the first place. That whole subject seems to very easily just devolve and become unproductive. And I found a lot of the people who pushed for a CoC and criticised me for cursing to be hypocritical and pointless. I could easily point you to various tweet storms by people who criticise my 'white cis male' behaviour, while at the same time cursing more than I ever do."
And again here:
"So that's my excuse for dismissing a lot of the politically correct concerns for years. I felt it wasn't worth it. Anybody who uses the words 'white cis male privilege' was simply not worth my time even talking to, I felt. "And I'm still not apologising for my gender or the colour of my skin, or the fact that I happen to have the common sexual orientation. What changed? Maybe it was me, but I was also made very aware of some of the behaviour of the 'other' side in the discussion. Because I may have my reservations about excessive political correctness, but honestly, I absolutely do not want to be seen as being in the same camp as the low-life scum on the internet that think it's OK to be a white nationalist Nazi, and have some truly nasty misogynistic, homophobic or transphobic behaviour."
It is fair to paraphrase this as his reputation and integrity, his life's work, and his achievements being threatened by unsubstantiated and invalid comparisons to "low-life scum on the internet that think it's OK to be a white nationalist Nazi, and have some truly nasty misogynistic, homophobic or transphobic behaviour."
Were you looking for threats of violence (which frankly are less alarming and damaging overall than attacks on the character and structure of society). There are groups of SJWs advocating violence toward Nazi's... when random straight white males are being invalidly equated to Nazi's that means general advocacy of violence toward straight white males. This is no different than advocating violence against all Muslims and equating them all to terrorists or considering any who won't disavow Islam to be terrorists.
Re: (Score:3)
And I found a lot of the people who pushed for a CoC and criticised me for cursing to be hypocritical and pointless.
So you are saying he was forced to apologise by the criticism he found hypocritical and pointless?
And I'm still not apologising for my gender or the colour of my skin, or the fact that I happen to have the common sexual orientation.
Yep, SJWs definitely got to him, forcing him to NOT apologise for being a straight white male.
Because I may have my reservations about excessive political correctness, but honestly, I absolutely do not want to be seen as being in the same camp as the low-life scum on the internet that think it's OK to be a white nationalist Nazi, and have some truly nasty misogynistic, homophobic or transphobic behaviour.
And the truth comes out. He noticed his behaviour was similar to some pretty awful people whose views he regarded as "truly nasty" and decided that he should change it.
How did you read his statement that went out of its way to say he wasn't pressured in to it or forced to apologise, which did its best to debunk your co
Re: (Score:2)
That kind of logic might be slightly more valid when consider
Re: (Score:2)
Our brains and bodies are bio
Re: (Score:2)
Look, the world is changing whether you like it or not.
That's a great argument for climate change. :-p
Re: (Score:2)
I'm really hoping that a more accommodating environment will allow more voices to get heard and prevent future messes such as BTRFS.
Remember when the fact that a poorly timed crash could completely delete old files was defended as a design decision with much rigor and insult? It wasn't Linus doing so, but it was certainly a product of the culture.
I suspect a little more willingness to hear sanity from others would have lead to the primary next gen file-system. It sounds like there were a lot of cultural iss
Re: (Score:2)
...and do you honestly think that Linux would let people just walk over him now? No way.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Insightful)
The main problem with Social Justice Warrior mob-style attack is that they function like a pack of hyenas. They will not attack until they sense weakness, but single hyenas will make forays to poke the target for weakness. But they will not make a full out attack until they see a weakness. But once they begin attacking, it's a bloodbath and does not stop until it's a full and unconditional surrender or utter defeat of the target.
This is why it's critically important that when Social Justice Mob attacks you, you never show any weakness and never flinch in the face of the brutal onslaught. Any sign of weakness, like an apology is a mark on you that you're the weak target and everyone in the pack goes after you instead of just a few scout hyenas poking you.
Linus caved with his apology and stepping back. He's now either their slave or a pariah in the eyes of anyone who is either a part of Social Justice Mob or is afraid of them and therefore will not take his side in fear of becoming a target himself.
He's done. That's the sad reality of the polarized world of today.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting description of SJW tactics. Such tactics won't work though. SJWs may think they scored an important point - but I don't think they will get any further. Linux development is still a meritocracy, SJWs hold no power over such organizations. Linux himself may have issued an apology - no "tought police" has been installed anywhere.
The mob attack only works when SJWs have time to install themselves in positions of power. But they aren't capable of real work, and so cannot get power in a true meri
Re: (Score:2)
Did Linus' project surrender and accept the SJW model of behaviour control?
My understanding is that the answer here is yes. The police for the rules will be the hyenas.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Insightful)
You live in a very fucked-up non-reality bro
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:4, Insightful)
Most of these people have never actually been in any management position, and most of them, quite frankly, are all talk on anonymous forums, but when push comes to shove, if they're hauled to the mat by their HR department for being insufferable prats, they'll roll over.
I have a great deal of admiration for Linus. He's pulled off one of the most extraordinary technology achievements in history. He gave the still pretty young open source community a functioning *nix kernel unimpeded (no matter what SCO thought) by the crazy licensing issues which had prevented Unix's adoption beyond servers and high end workstations.
But he's a fucking asshole. There are ways to deal with people who are doing substandard work that doesn't involve vast streams of personal insults. There are even ways of basically telling someone who has clearly subpar skills to take a walk that don't involve public dressings down. That kind of behavior effects all the developers, even the ones who are doing a damned good job. And the realpolitik of the situation is pretty simple; much of Linux is being developed by developers in corporate environments, and those corporations pretty much all of have codes of conduct, and they have every right to expect that the maintainer and overall strategist for the project that they are contributing resources to abide by a similar set of rules. If Linus wanted to prevent forking of Linux, in effect he being fired, and someone else whose vision, quite frankly, might not be at all in the open source community's best interests, taking over the fork with the greater resources, he had to alter his behavior and demonstrate that he meant it.
So all the chest thumpers here can basically get stuffed. They're delusional beta male types who like to imagine themselves in some alternative universe being alpha males. They've got a massive inferiority complex that they betray every time they talk about SJWs. They're mean spirited fantasists who in all likelihood will never be in any kind of management position because, well, they're emotionally-fraught cunts.
Re: Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:2)
But he's a fucking asshole.
And yet we could use more just like him.*
*The problem isn't abrasive and impatient pragmatists; it's chaotic, confused minds and fragile egos.
Re:Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:5, Insightful)
But he's a fucking asshole. There are ways to deal with people who are doing substandard work that doesn't involve vast streams of personal insults.
Did you put these two sentences next to each other to invoke irony or hypocrisy (or both)? I can't tell.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hi, I have been in a management position for the last 5 years. how about yourself? I am an electrician, I deal with people that couldn't write any code if you did it for them and asked them to close the statement. I don't LIKE having to yell at my guys/girl that work for us. But the truth is what we do can kill somebody and when they make a mistake that puts peoples lives in jeopardy I lose my shit, most of them don't cry about it(even our femanazi), sometimes you have to get personal and let the person kno
Re: Step 1: Remove the Code of Cancer. (Score:2)
Most of the time, the immaturity is a good thing. You can advance nothing if you accept everything.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's for the moment say that your premise is correct.
That those who have the intelligence and drive to build the things that make life better for a lot of people.
This means that there are two options. First, let them be nerds and build things and enjoy a better life.
Or try to get a "piece of their action" by trying to make them conform to your personal standards of etiquette and worldview to make room for those who can't really build things, but think it would be cool to build them. And then wake up one
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Linus is married with 3 children (no, NOT married to children - 3 children with his spouse, Tove Torvalds), so I doubt there will be any proof of the claim any time soon :)
Re: (Score:3)
Heard this and the other conspiracy theory about Linus never being alone in a room with a woman, but never seen any evidence that it's true.
You mean when the stuff started coming out that the ada initiative was honeypotting people in order to pressure them out of jobs or positions of influence to get other people in there? That's where the rumors of Linus never being in a room alone with a woman came from.
Meanwhile Linux hasn't forked, hasn't been destroyed, the predicted mass exodus of developers and use of the CoC to oust all straight white men hasn't happened.
Yeah the only reason why it didn't happen is because contributors and developers refused to bow to it, and that's the reason why Linus is suddenly coming back. This isn't rocket surgery, this is what happens when a moral busybody pushes some
Re: (Score:3)
Not really. The reason why it didn't happen is because there was no reason for it to happen in the first place. All the people complaining about SJWs are quickly becoming far more obtrusive than the SJWs themselves.
Really? So explain how people who don't want intrusiveness in their lives and to be left alone is more obtrusive then SJW's who want to restrict speech, engage in witch hunts, and demand historical monuments to be torn down are worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Well the primary reason is that those people demand others self-censor and not criticise their behaviour, because it makes them uncomfortable and sometimes has other consequences. Of course they are happy to criticise everyone and everything all the time, because they think they are right. It's wrongthink that they object to.
Re: (Score:2)
Except McCarthy was right.
Holy crap.
There were not communists everywhere. Most of the people accused of being communists and "un-American" were not. Innocent people lost everything because of the witch hunt.
You say SJWs are hunting and destroying their enemies, yet you think the guy who famously did just that on the flimsiest of evidence, often mere rumour or aggressive and unfair questioning, was right. McCarthy, the poster boy for paranoid delusions of conspiracies.
Anything happen when he was gone? (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean with the actual development of Linux? I seem to be getting regular kernel update.
Other then Linus trying to keep a cooler head, it was also a test to have Linux development controlled by someone else for a while to make sure it will still function, that all the support and infrastructure was in place.
If something happen to Linus, I really don't want to see the End of Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course nothing happened. The shitstorm over the Code of Conduct was just the latest moral panic, largely ignored by people it actually affects.
Re: (Score:3)
Over the years, he has set up a highly hierarchical power structure based on trust and loyalty with him at the top. Sort of dictatorial. That is not necessarily a bad thing as long as he manages it with the right goals in mind, and he seems to have done that fairly well.
(It was often said the best leadership is a benevolent monarchy.)
I think this speaks to strong focused goals and the ability to exclude
Re: (Score:2)
it was also a test to have Linux development controlled by someone else for a while to make sure it will still function, that all the support and infrastructure was in place.
Nothing happened when he was gone. Including no leadership, no major developments, no strategic decisions. If this was a "test" for "control" then it missed on both the test and the control part of it.
Car Analogy:
This was a test to see if someone is able to be a full time truck driver, by having him climb into the cabin, start the engine and then calling it a success before they even reached for the gearstick.
Re: (Score:2)
The issue isn't what happened in the past, but the fact that there is insight to improve in the future.
Most of us on Slashdot come from Christian influenced cultures, while many may not follow or believe in the religions, the religion has indeed influenced the culture, and its residence. A major aspect of Christianity is the idea of repentance. Where one realizes what they were doing was wrong, and works to make it better. Yes this comes at a risk of having bad people just fake it. But the value of a re
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Now lately in the news we see a lot of people getting put in jail or in general trouble for what they did when they were much younger. However they are not being repentant about it, just defiant about it. Thus not getting our sympathy.
B.S. if anything that's just people deciding that the inquisition and witch hunts are fine things if they get to do them and pick the targets Linus was targeted because he had a no nonsense style in running the project that bears his name.
right (Score:5, Insightful)
Whether he'll be a kinder and gentler Torvalds remains to be seen.
Which is part of the problem with these public confession/appeasement things.
Someone can always claim you didn't get "woke" enough.
Re: (Score:2)
*) Yes i
Re: (Score:2)
100% this.
An old mentor of mine always said - "Never apologize just to mollify someone, unless it is really and truly your fault. Saying sorry admits guilt."
I don't know if the poster way above has any merit (Linus being blackmailed), but I for one think Linus should continue to be acerbic in his criticism of code and life goes on. I've read some of those flamewars. It was never about the people. Just the code. Shit code is shit code. Call a spade a spade.
I also agree that a loosely written code of
Re: right (Score:2)
Saying sorry means you possess the feeling of sorrow. It means nothing more.
Re:right (Score:5, Interesting)
There's rarely a need to bring right and wrong into these matters, and an apology is basically an admission of guilt.
I've been pondering this a lot lately. As ridiculous as Trump is, his lack of remorse for anything and everything has shown a kind of fault line in the way in which today's culture has become a culture of blame. Most public figures, when confronted with something that brings public ire, try to apologize even if they don't really feel bad about it, because they think that apologies will diffuse the situation. But these days an apology is not just an admission of guilt; it's also an admission of weakness. It causes people to go in for the kill like a pack of wolves. Trump is just about the only person who can survive in such a situation, precisely because he refuses to apologize and simply "misremembers" what he said or did in a convenient way. Thus ironically it's the kind of witch hunt culture today that has helped to cement Trump's position. Every time people attack him, he shows his dominance by refusing to apologize.
This is visible, for example, in the difference between the affairs of Bill Clinton and Trump's tryst with Stormy Daniels. Now in terms of morality, both deeds are of course gravely sinful, despite being mutual (notwithstanding the illicit power dynamic in the case of Bill, though Hillary still refuses to acknowledge it). But looking at the cultural/political impact, apart from the question of right and wrong, it's fascinating how Trump is able to weather the storm simply by refusing to apologize. It's almost as if, in the public eye, it's the apology that constitutes the sin.
Re:right (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right on the culture of blame, but misunderstand why Trump is able to whether it. It's because he refuses to "bow" to the politically correct culture around it and through it. People were getting pissed off over it ~20 years ago, that PC culture has gotten far worse over the last 6 years. Everything from destroying historical monuments, to active discrimination against others "for the greater good" for education, job positions, loans, and so forth. In general western society was on a very good track towards meritocracy, and the political left injected identity politics into it hard pushing that if you don't fall in line with what they tell you, then you're a racist, sexist, misogynist, rapist, and so on.
You can round all of this out, that in many cases the people who are screaming this culture of blame from the rooftops are people who've actually done the things they've accused others of. The rank hypocrisy is simply the final nail in the coffin for it.
Re: right (Score:3)
"I'm sorry you have a headache" doesn't mean the speaker caused it. Although it might.
Apologizing for historic crimes doesn't mean you possess a TARDIS.
Hidden meanings, secret codes, this is not a good communication strategy. I suggest saying what you mean, meaning what you say, never using coded messages outside of IPSec, GnuPG or SSL.
Re: (Score:2)
Most public figures, when confronted with something that brings public ire, try to apologize
I agree with the rest of your post but I find that politicians do know to not apologize. They have learned instead to blame, misdirect, or just plain flip-flop and claim you always held the opposite position.
George H W Bush apologized for raising taxes, and became a 1 term president. Note that congress raised the taxes, not him, and he only voted for the spending bill to avoid a government shutdown.
Compare that to his son George W Bush, who sent the US into the Iraq war on false pretenses and caused a wor
Think of it this way.. (Score:2)
I just got done reading a great book Mistake Were Made (But Not By Me) [amazon.com]. It's a very good read and quite insightful about how we justify our actions. It goes into how for the most part, people can't admit they made a mistake. In your example, Bill Clinton did not own up to his mistake. George W Bush maintained that there WERE WMDs in Iraq and we were completely justified in invading and occupying them. When faced with facts, people will double-down on their clearly incorrect statements. It talks abou
Re: (Score:2)
Now in terms of morality, both deeds are of course gravely sinful, despite being mutual (notwithstanding the illicit power dynamic in the case of Bill, though Hillary still refuses to acknowledge it).
Are you implying that Hillary needs to apologize to Monica Lewinsky because of her husband's wandering penis? That's just weird. Generally, it's the cheating parties who apologize to the spouse who didn't cheat.
The consensual doesn't excuse the non-consensual (Score:2)
> > This is visible, for example, in the difference between the affairs of Bill Clinton and Trump's tryst with Stormy Daniels. Now in terms of morality, both deeds are of course gravely sinful, despite being mutual (notwithstanding the illicit power dynamic in the case of Bill, though Hillary still refuses to acknowledge it).
Paula Jones didn't consent. She won a lawsuit against Bill. Bill was convicted of perjury during said lawsuit, which triggered impeachment. He settled all the cases after losin
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really want to get into a political tangent, but I don't think Trump's ability to get away with things is a result of his handling of them. I think it more has to do with who is followers are. Republicans have spent years working their base into a frenzy over crackpot conspiracy theories, so they can easily be in denial about things that would otherwise upset them. A lot of them are completely hostile toward "political correctness" and therefore women claiming to have been assaulted (I know that
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's not "witch hunt culture", it's that politics is now post-truth.
It's not? So why in the UK are progressives doxing pro-brexit individuals? Why are progressives trying to dox and harass chinese immigrants in Canada, who became legal citizens for protesting against illegal immigration. Why are progressives in the US stating that "speech is violence" and then using word salad going after peoples jobs. Why did progressives try to dox and harass Lindsay Shepard for wanting to have an open immigration debate by having all sides including extremist views presented. What p
Re: (Score:2)
What about Juanita Broderick & Paula Jones?
I didn't see Monica's name in what you replied to, you just kinda assumed that because she's the only name people know.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone can always claim you didn't get "woke" enough.
That's not a problem with public appeasement. You can't please everyone. The correct response is to say "right fuck it it was a waste of time", and proceed to go old school on them. That gives them a healthy dose of perspective.
Re: right (Score:2)
Define perspective and the Blue Peter badge you got for making one earlier.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether he'll be a kinder and gentler Torvalds remains to be seen.
Which is part of the problem with these public confession/appeasement things.
Someone can always claim you didn't get "woke" enough.
No one is ever woke enough.
But yeah, I'm expecting a Linux Social Justice distro any day.
A Whole Month? (Score:2)
I can't imagine that trying to understand empathy and integrate it into your personality is like one of those sham Hollywood 28 day substance abuse therapy retreats. It will be interesting to see if anything about Linus' demeanor changes.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine that trying to understand empathy and integrate it into your personality is like one of those sham Hollywood 28 day substance abuse therapy retreats.
Has anyone ever told you that it takes about a month to override a habit? Actually, a minimum of about three weeks, though it can be as long as eight. 28 days is perfectly valid for people who want to change. Changing addictive behaviors is not a simple matter of sharing information, though; you have to address the root cause or else people tend to return to their addictions in weak moments. For example, I had stopped smoking for two years when my car was stolen. I walked straight up to the store and got a
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
So it seems he is able to survive without smaltalk just fine.
So now you know that if you ask him a question you will get an anser, even if you don't like the answer. You will even get an answer without asking a question.
If you think it will be different, I have to ask: what have you been smoking?
I have a bit of Linus in me, where I work to surround myself with those who are not precious and easily insulted. I'm certainly not prone to his level of profanity, but don't deal much in smalltalk.
But if I were to offer him a suggestion, (damn, how's that for conceit) appoint someone to deal with problem people in a better way.
You can't run an organization catering to people who use bitching and moaning as a workplace tool. I've been in enough groups to understand that once the whiners get a toehold, t
What's so surprising??? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It would appear that you suffer the problem you are projecting onto others. "A rational person with an IQ higher than the thermostat" might deduce what you are advocating here and conclude that you are a "left wing activist" that "cannot reconcile two principles they've advocated".
You might first consider the concept of accountability and rethink your false equivalency between someone who loses a job for bad behavior and the bombing of innocents. Maybe then you will feel less "entitled to be disruptive, t
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
No small part of it is because the left has adopted a view that "marginalized people" are effectively entitled to be disruptive, toxic, etc. Because discrimination(tm).
BS.
2. "Marginalized people" cannot be guilty of oppressing "non-marginalized people" no matter how they behave.
This.
is. just. bullshit. claim. by. those. who. don't. want. to. give. their. entitlement. to. bully. any. and. every. minority. they. feel. like. they. don't. like.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe you can start with not using ignorant labels like "stupid stupid left", "lefties" and "brainwashed left". "Left" is a meaningless term and your use of it as a basis of your criticism shows that you are perfectly willing to make the same stupid mistakes that you are criticizing.
The solution to these problems is reason and objective thinking and the "right" has no greater monopoly on this than the "left" having apparently abandoned it completely.
One thing is certain, society has no room for individual
Did he get rid of those blue haired whiners? (Score:4, Informative)
When you allow too many professional complainers and trouble makers, usually with bizarre hair colour and face piercings, your team or even the whole business will got sh**t. Don't hire those freaks and keep everyone else happy.
Re: (Score:2)
My personal suspicion is that this comes from the same source, an excessively attention seeking personality that doesn't really care about the effects of that behavior on others around them. To them it doesn't matter that they're wasting ev
King Lear and Hidetora Ichimonji (Score:2)
The fates of the two characters in title should caution anyone at the head of anything to not give up control if they still care...
I agree 100% (Score:4, Insightful)
If anything is obvious it is that whatever process led to the creation of the greatest operating system ever written, that process, needs to change!
Everyone knows that when you've got the top product, company, or team, you need to pull a 180.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that was okay but I miss my NeXTStep with Display Postscript. This X crap Linux comes with is poor substitute.
Scar tissue (Score:2)
I want to know where he went and who "explained" things to him.
Someone should check his forehead for scars.
Also, why isn't this in the summary: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.html [kernel.org].
Which has a LOT of really good language. Like how the scope doesn't include other forums. And you're not going to get banned for things you said years ago. But every damn thing in here should be a patch or update to that pile of garbage that is the original CoC. It's a damn good argum
Happened to me (Score:2)
If anyone is interested, I got squashed in the #MeToo timeframe, about 15 years ago. What happened was a kernel update suddenly started making my Abit BP6 (dual) lock-up. I traced it to a new System Management Interupt service routine that would not handle double-interrupts. Masking off would fix it.
I reported this on the LKML, and eventually Linus commented "We don't fix broken hardware." True enough, the SMI bus was vomitous (unbalanced, open-drain). But I'm older than Linus, and remember when softwa
Re: (Score:2)
I think the tech SJW's killed Terry Davis!
Re: (Score:2)
Go eat a bag of dicks, hater.
Re: (Score:2)
We Finns are direct, not impolite.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux runs programs written in Visual Basic 6 through two userspace frameworks: X.Org X11 and Wine. For Visual Basic .NET, it uses X.Org X11 and Mono [mono-project.com]. What support from the kernel would make VB programs more efficient?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
VB needs a peek and poke statement to access kernel memory.
Re: Wait..what? (Score:3)
X11. If your client is on a separate machine, the correct way to run it, then you need a way to send audio to it.
Re: (Score:2)