
Linux – The beginning of the end? - coldtea
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/linux-beginning-of-the-end.html
======
quantummkv
> You cannot expect people from Finland, Spain, Turkey, Namibia, or Japan to
> behave the same way, talk the same way, express themselves the same way. You
> cannot expect them to just normalize to a cookie-cutter template and move
> on. That does not work. And yet, that's the expectation, because that's how
> the US-centric IT world is designed.

This. Right here. The fanatics in the OSS world (and Tech at large) seem to
have forgotten that Silicon Valley != The World. This is not 1984 with a
standardized society defined by the Big Brother in Menlo Park.

You will find that most of these "cultural/offensive" flame wars in tech are
fought because someone forgot to step out of the silicon valley bubble they
reside in. Take what happened with Redis. The Master/Slave terminology does
not raise much eyebrows outside of USA simply because these parts of the world
did not have large scale slavery of black people. And yet some SV people
expect to everyone to know American history and culture. They seem to live in
a dream world where only the American culture exists and then get violent when
the reality hits them.

And before someone comes with a respect and work with my culture shtick,
please remember that it is a two way street. We are not under any obligation
to respect only your culture and mannerisms. You also have a responsibility to
understand other cultures and respect them and understand their mannerisms and
way of thinking.

~~~
notacoward
> The fanatics in the OSS world (and Tech at large) seem to have forgotten
> that Silicon Valley != The World

When it comes to attitudes and languages, Silicon Valley is sometimes quite
different than tech in the rest of the US. As a developer in the northeastern
US, one of the adjustments I've had to make in working for an archetypal
Silicon Valley company is to the way people express themselves and
particularly how they express disagreement or criticism (i.e. in a way that
can be interpreted either as more gentle or more passive-aggressive depending
on context). You raise a good point, but I think the differences are even
greater than you (or the OP) think.

Of course, talking about this on extremely SV-centric Hacker News might not
achieve very much.

~~~
ryandrake
Yea, if you've been in the SV bubble for too long you might not even perceive
it!

One of the biggest cultural things I struggled to get used to when I moved out
to the Bay Area for work (originally from the northeast too), was the extent
to which I needed to constantly self-censor and water down my wording to the
point of meaninglessness, simply to avoid offending someone or coming across
as too harsh. People out here have such thin skin, and you're always walking
on eggshells when you need to disagree with something. It's a kind of
newspeak, where it colors every interaction with people and makes it
impossible to deliver certain messages effectively, without sugar-coating or
couching with "probablys" and "maybes". When you take this culture and these
rules and assume the entire world plays by them, you're likely to end up
looking totally out of touch.

EDIT: Self-censored a little. :-)

~~~
notacoward
Here's a question I often like to ask myself about people I interact with:

> What is this person's equivalent of "F you"?

For a typical east-coaster or northern European it's likely to be exactly as
in the question. ;) For some people, "I'm not sure I 100% agree" is about as
close as you'll ever get. The left-coast average seems to be _much_ closer to
the second option. I'm not saying it's a bad thing - in fact I find it quite
pleasant - but it can trip you up until you get used to it. At my last job, it
took me years to figure out how to interpret my Indian colleagues' responses
correctly (if indeed I ever did). This kind of calibration is an under-
appreciated skill.

------
rbanffy
I really, genuinely, don't understand why such a bland code of conduct would
be a turn off to anyone. I may not be easy to be around, but I try not to be
abrasive while, at the same time, making clear why I think something is the
way I think.

If you think someone is wrong very often, I believe saying why the person is
wrong on every occasion will provide them with actionable information much
better than calling them an imbecile. The goal is not to make the person go
away, but to help them produce better ideas.

If someone verbally assaults me, I'll defend my point or, when provided with
valid reasons, I'll behave like an adult and correct it. If I ever come across
as abusive, let me know and I'll try to be a better person in the future.

Is that really too much to ask?

~~~
scirocco
Agree.

Open Source values will still remain - working in a transparent, open (not
always nice) way.

More with CoC, harassing people will not be tolerated

~~~
CryptoRetired
The entire point of the CoC is it creates a process whereby people not
involved in the project can harass members of the project while remaining
anonymous.

Notice the people making a stink about Linus do it by taking out of context,
lying about what he said and have managed to get people to think he should
step down.(and are putting in place a “code” that lets them do it even though
he’s the kindest non-bigoted person you could think of.)

It’s completely political and it’s discriminatory.

~~~
alkonaut
> The entire point of the CoC is it creates a process whereby people not
> involved in the project can harass members of the project while remaining
> anonymous.

So there is a lot of people peripheral to these projects, that want nothing
more than to disrupt by harassing people completely unknown to them, under a
veil of anonymity? And that's the _point_ of these CoC's?

Who _are_ these people you speak of? Some secret cabal of "SJW's"?

You are saying the point isn't to codify some ground rules for collaboration
and communication, which are then in rare cases _abused_ by some individuals,
the abuse is the _point_? Please.

------
CryptoRetired
I am a gay man[0] who has contributed to a number of open source projects
significantly. However I stopped when they implemented “Code of Conducts” that
deny basic rights such as innocent until proven guilty and the right to face
your accuser. (The popular one keeps accusers anonymous, thus the victim has
no chance to defend themselves.)

The truth is a maintainer can eject someone without a CoC. The purpose of CoC,
as stated by its author in her very bigoted and hostile twitter feed is to
eradicate meritocracy.

CoC lets some random person with a political axe to grind derail a project
with accusations about things done outside the project (Eg a disagreement on
twitter) backed up with a gang of people accusing the project maintainers of
being bigots if they don’t eject their intended victim.[1]

This is bullying.

I won’t invest time in projects where the contributors are not respected and
maintainers will listen to a politically motivated mob over reason.

Since the proponents of CoCs seemingly are always people who violate them
constantly (under the CoC its own author should be kicked from every project
that adopts it based on her twitter comments) it’s clear the intention is not
to protect anyone.

The intention is to force their politics into open source projects.

[0] This means I get to see abuse from straight bigots as well as SJWs who
hate me for being male and apparently think preferring men is discrimination
against women! (Or so they have told me on twitter.). I only mention I’m gay
here so you understand I’m not some neonazi. I’ve been jumped outside a bar
and called a faggot in Oklahoma, but I don’t feel these “codes of conduct” do
anything to protect me, quite the opposite. So they don’t address the key case
that I’m guessing HN users will assume they do. Gay men are considered highly
privileged these days, and thus subhuman.

[1] There are many examples, check the reddit threads in /r/Linux of the abuse
of CoC.

~~~
Tbrowaway1q72
Sorry to say but proven until guilty and basic rights does not apply to
everything in life (tax law, private endeavors, I can refuse service to
someone, I can kick you out from my home without listening to you if I think
you did something wrong). If someone is accusing you and they don't want to
hear you, stop contributing. It is is not criminal justice. You are not
obligated to spend your time fighting with assholes. Find better proj to spend
your time on, just as you written.

~~~
_pmf_
> If someone is accusing you and they don't want to hear you, stop
> contributing.

You're assuming he's contributing privately and can stop at leisure.

~~~
Tbrowaway1q72
He wrote he stopped.

------
dimman
I just want to reiterate what glandium wrote in a comment further down:

"He didn't step down. He's taking a break. It's not the first time he takes a
break either. Let's not be too alarmist."

~~~
agumonkey
Also I fear this situation is at a loss loss interpretation. If Linus doesn't
take time off he's a sociopath, if he does, linux is dead...

I do agree that it's somehow worrisome, but I tend to think that open
discussion, and slowing down is a sign of health rather than the opposite.
Time will tell.

~~~
krylon
Personally, I like to consider Linus taking time off to work on his social
skills (whether it is really necessary or not) a sign of personal growth.

Time will tell how things will change in the Linux development world, but on a
personal level, I think it is kind of admirable to face such an issue and be
so open about it.

------
ealhad
I really think the internet should calm down; this is not even the first time
Linus Torvalds takes a break — and in 2005, the result was git.

------
lanevorockz
I am a Linux developer and contributor for a few decades and the code of
conduct simply killed any interest in contributing to it. It won't take long
until backdoors are introduced on Linux. Activists that joined the community
for money will have full control and the ability of banning any criticism. We
really need Linus back.

~~~
Certhas
Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? If a code
of conduct hurts your feelings that much maybe you're just not cut out for
collaborative work.

I really wonder where the great fear that CoCs will be abused to shut down
disagreement comes from. I am not a fan of policing language, but there just
aren't many real examples of such abuse out there.

Here is the actual list of examples from the CoC. Which of these do you need
to do in order to feel happy to contribute to Linux development?

+Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: \+ +* The use of
sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or \+ advances
+* Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
+* Public or private harassment +* Publishing others’ private information,
such as a physical or electronic \+ address, without explicit permission +*
Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a \+
professional setting

Fight overreach, by all means. Make sure that the CoC contains means to fight
overreach. That's all good. But the whole "I can't contribute to this project
anymore because I find SJWs offensive" whinging strikes me as deeply
hypocritical.

~~~
rndgermandude
> Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? If a code
> of conduct hurts your feelings that much maybe you're just not cut out for
> collaborative work.

This is a personal attack, very thinly veiled. If Hacker News had the same
code of conduct, your account would have to be banned at worst.

~~~
Certhas
That's fair, it's definitely a way to read this. I shouldn't respond to
hyperbolic language with the like. I'll edit it.

Edit: Too late, I can't edit anymore unfortunately. Let me rephrase:

"Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It's work that anyone who
wants to work in a collaborative project can reasonably be expected to do. If
this is objectionable to you, then maybe this collaboration isn't for you."

~~~
zeroname
> Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard.

It can be quite hard to live up to _everyone 's_ standards of "decency". You
just failed to do it.

> I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like.

Write that on the chalkboard one hundred times and maybe we'll let it slide.
This time.

~~~
Certhas
Yeah, I was called out on it, and I corrected myself. I wouldn't want to be
part of a project that bans people who make an effort towards decency. The
fact that standards differ and a consensus needs to be found for what
constitutes decency is not an argument against it.

What point are you trying to illustrate? Are you saying I shouldn't have been
called out on it? Because I disagree. The fact was, I found the post I replied
to annoying, and I replied in a tone that was stronger than it needed to be.
It's a good thing that was called out. Next time I'll take a breather before
replying and we'll have a more constructive exchange.

~~~
stonith
I think part of the problem is that in the CoC context, the slighted party now
looks at your username, cross references it against reddit and twitter,
searches your posts for something else to take umbrage at, and makes the case
that you should be excluded from the community. The result is a very real
chilling effect on speech on all public platforms because now you're _never_
allowed to make a comment that might be taken out of context to offend now or
at any time in the future.

~~~
adamrezich
This is the key to the whole thing and I'm glad someone finally said it. Open-
source projects aren't incapable of getting rid of contributors who cause
problems to the detriment of project productivity without having a formalized
Code of Conduct. Why add something to a project that causes more problems than
it solves? CoC proponents have good intentions but fail to see the chilling
effect potential, even as it plays itself out in real time, right on cue
(Ts'o).

------
nalllar
/r/linux has been full of arguments about this recently.

The moderation team claims that many of the people arguing against the CoC
appear to be new to /r/linux.

> We have noticed a large influx of accounts this past week that have never
> commented or posted in /r/Linux before. We have also seen a large number of
> accounts being created just to comment on these posts. ~ /u/Kruug

From
[https://aa.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/9i43t9/dont_worry_the...](https://aa.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/9i43t9/dont_worry_there_wont_be_anything_like_that/e6i66jp/)

~~~
pjc50
Yes, the problem is there's a significant ""pro-abuse"" movement around who
are willing to turn up anywhere these issues are discussed despite not having
any previous involvement with the community and argue that they need to be
continued to drive away marginalised people and anyone who doesn't have an
extremely thick skin.

(Not directed at anyone specific, but I notice some green text in this thread
too)

------
ATsch
I find the doom-and-gloom over the CoC change absolutely silly. Plenty of
projects have a CoC and none of them have just died a fiery death because
there were rules against treating people badly. As other people pointed out,
there's a big difference between putting everything into 15 layers of business
speak and just not insulting people. Linus is, to me, obviously advocating the
latter.

~~~
CryptoRetired
BSD is dying.

~~~
_pmf_
Does Netcraft confirm it?

------
type0
The phrases like "you need to go and learn some empathy through sensitivity
training" are deeply offensive to autistic spectrum individuals, this is where
the whole "inclusion" thing falls down on its double standards. Also the whole
obsession with skin color and gender as if that would automatically mean that
those individuals are more diverse is simply not true, you can't be diverse if
you only allow homogeneity of thoughts and ideas (which is the most important
part).

------
yongjik
Sigh. For 27 years, Linux has been maintained by a frankly abrasive person who
weren't afraid to show middle finger to a big company, say some coders should
be "retroactively aborted", and even say "shut the fuck up" to a co-
contributor. We were told that it was part of Finnish culture of being direct,
and although some people grumbled (and some thought that was a load of BS),
people didn't really mind that much, worked together, and built the Linux we
know now.

Now, for once, Linus Torvalds thinks it's time for change and maybe everyone
could be a little nicer to everyone else, and suddenly we hear doom and gloom
and how yielding to the American "SJW" culture will ruin Linux for everyone.

I wonder what choice words Linus-of-yesteryear would have uttered to see the
shenanigan.

------
throw2016
There needs to be more frank discussions about corporate and vested interests
and how to protect the independence of the kernel which Linus has managed well
till now.

Automatic assumptions that what is good for Redhat or Google is good for
everyone do not hold. These companies have real power, thousands of employees,
media and industry support, funding, and lots of people reluctant to go
against them or keen to curry favour so they can overwhelm any decision or
discussion with resources. This must be recognized.

Linus is obviously not easy to replace but there should be some kind of
succession planning and also thinking in detail about how to retain the
independence of the development process from powerful interests.

This latter is something that not enough attention has been paid to in open
source. Security fud is often used to raise complexity and indirectly
encourage corporate interests and monopoly. The control of standards is also
used to push complexity and raise barriers.

In the long term its only the ability of smaller groups to develop software
that can ensure users are not held hostage by vested interests. The Linux
kernel is hugely important to open source and it needs to be managed well to
encourage and motivate the next generation of contributors.

------
killjoywashere
> Should he have apologized? Yes, privately

If you cross someone privately, apologize privately. If you cross someone
publicly, especially a subordinate, you owe them a public apology. Because you
burned _all_ their relationships.

------
xolorg
CoC encourages harrassment through doxing and witch-hunts. It actually has the
opposite effect.

You were rude to me on a bug tracker? I'll dox you and find something you said
5 years ago which is offensive and report it to the committee to get you
banned.

~~~
benwad
This is the CoC that many projects subscribe to: [https://www.contributor-
covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-con...](https://www.contributor-
covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct)

The relevant snippet is here:

\--------

Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:

The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or
advances

Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks

Public or private harassment

 _Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
address, without explicit permission_

Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
professional setting

\--------

i.e. the CoC explicitly mentions doxxing as against the CoC.

~~~
LunaSea
Oops, too late:
[https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941](https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941)

------
kingofhdds
I can relate to this, although for me it feels rather comical than offensive:

 _I find the phrase "I am excited" used in almost every business announcement
to be offensive, because it is not genuine, nor does it indicate what type of
excitement is being felt - excitement merely means an elevated state of
emotions, could be good, could be bad_

------
IshKebab
Oh come on. Linus isn't just direct in a culturally different way. He calls
people idiots and belittles them all the time. You can be direct without that
and I'm glad Linus has finally realised it (seriously; it's extremely
difficult to admit your flaws).

Have a look:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/linusrants/](https://www.reddit.com/r/linusrants/)

------
notacoward
To me, it seems that the biggest lesson here has to do with cults of
personality. No matter how awesome he is, Linus should _never_ have been put
up on such a high pedestal, given such a complete pass on everything he said,
for so long. The longer it went on, the more he attracted both imitators and
detractors. When he had a change of heart (and BTW I think the person who
talked to him and finally made a difference was probably his daughter),
neither of those two groups knew how to handle it gracefully. I've seen plenty
of BS from both the Reddit/4chan troll army on one side (quite prevalent in
this thread) and the anti-LF clique on the other (haven't seen them here yet)
since then.

It's particularly interesting to contrast this with the relatively smooth
process of the Python community. They adopted a code of conduct a while ago,
and more recently Guido van Rossum - he for whom the term "Benevolent Dictator
For Life" was invented - stepped down. There was some contention, but nothing
like what we're seeing for Linux. I don't think it's because of the two
projects' prominence. I think it's because Guido was never as polarizing as
Linus. Again, the lesson is perhaps that _nobody_ should be allowed to drive a
project of that size toward such a cliff.

~~~
adamrezich
This is a highly revisionist version of events.

~~~
notacoward
OK, so what did I get wrong? Please explain exactly which facts are incorrect,
and what the correct version would be. Or is "revisionist" just a content-free
dismissal of something other than _your_ personal preferred narrative? Put up
your version, and we'll see who the revisionist is.

~~~
adamrezich
The main thing is, I've yet to see any evidence that Linus' "abuse" actually
hurt anyone in any way. Peoples' reactions ranged from amusement to cringing
but I don't think anyone ever took his hyperbolic over-the-top profanity
seriously. nobody was actually being hurt, and the Linux kernel developed into
an amazing product that's in use everywhere around the world. Anyone who
doesn't like the way Linus does things is free to fork the repo and do their
own thing, and always has been.

Many people seem to want to paint Linux as having this terrible internal
culture because mean ol' Linus was always randomly insulting people for no
good reason, and I just haven't seen any proof of that myself. The idea that
Linus _had_ to change strikes me as odd--he wasn't hurting anyone, and nobody
thought he was, until recently.

~~~
notacoward
> I've yet to see any evidence that Linus' "abuse" actually hurt anyone in any
> way.

I have a feeling this will get dragged down into hair-splitting over what
"hurt anyone" means, but I've known or known of several people whose careers
were negatively affected. Sage Sharp comes immediately to mind. Some of the
people who have tried to get security or real-time-scheduling patches in, only
to met with a wall of invective, also come to mind. Sure, they probably went
on to do their work elsewhere or maintain it as private patches, and were
content doing so, but I'd still say that denied them recognition they deserved
and also represent missed opportunities for Linux itself. I've personally
stayed away from working on the Linux kernel, despite having worked on kernels
since before Linux existed and thus knowing both the technical and cultural
issues involved, because I just didn't want to be around him or Al Viro or
some of the others I'd have to work with to get patches in.

So I have a different perspective than you. How is that "revisionist"?
Couldn't that label be applied to your "nothing bad ever happened" version
just as easily?

> The idea that Linus had to change strikes me as odd

Whether he had to or not, _he_ felt it was beneficial to do so. Maybe those
who idolize him should consider that he might have been right this time too.

------
type0
Why is this article flagged?

------
anotherevan
If Linux has survived the past vitriol, I'm pretty sure it would flourish in
future civility.

------
tomlock
> Not a corporate-approved kangaroo court.

Is this really what happened? To me it appeared like a bunch of Linus's close
friends told him he was acting like a jerk, and he agreed. Building this into
some kind of global movement out to punish wrongthink smacks of conspiracy
theory to me.

~~~
LunaSea
Has happened many times in the past in other open source projects:
[https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941](https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941)

~~~
tomlock
This doesn't address my comment.

------
exikyut
I get the impression (or maybe this is the point and I'm just dense) that the
article is saying that Linus's aggressiveness matched corporate aggressiveness
head-to-head, and that this meant Linux didn't get engulfed by corporate
agenda to the extent that it lost its core integrity and values.

I also think I'm reading the notion that perhaps Linus' apology and temporary
stepping-down to reflect introduces hesitancy about the
authority/legitimacy/validity of his position and views.

Maybe so. I don't think this will have a negative impact on Linux itself
though. For all the chaos it's wrought, the GPLv2 kind of saves things
somewhat here; even if Linus steps down, we'll be fine: the whole world is
Linux-specific, and while Linux is just a syscall interface it's also a
_rather important thing_ that initializes and maintains the state of your
hardware and peripherals for you, and this _rather important thing_ happens to
be under this license that doesn't let you proprietary-ify it in certain ways.

This is awesome.

Until someone makes a perfectly Linux-compatible kernel with a different
license model.

The idea makes sense. Notwithstanding whatever ideas you might associate with
Lennart Poettering, I remember him saying (although I can't find it right
now...) that Linux is pretty much the future and that nothing else
(translation: BSD) really matters. I think this was regarding GNOME and/or
systemd BSD support. Some may think FreeBSD (at least) might want to have a
word with Lennart, but still...

So far Microsoft have a partially complete UNIX^HLinux reimplementation.
Honestly quite an amazing 360° there... they currently seem to be trying to
lure "modern developers" to Azure. I can't say I quite get the rationale
there, but okay, cool. (Not dissing it, I genuinely don't "get" it.)

FreeBSD's quiet use in things like the PlayStation 4 is similar to MINIX's use
in Intel CPUs: the fact that it's a UNIX is a throwaway implementation detail.
Linux is completely different - compatibility encapsulates everything from the
syscall table to the location of specific files, to the existence of /proc,
/sys and similar, to the fact that graphics and windowing are (for now...) X11
based, to the fact that the shell works the way it does (read: that the shell
uses the GNU coreutils).

Google decided to avoid the UNIX thing altogether, instead opting to create
their own new thing. This makes sense: Google have server-side, client-side,
and everything in between to think about, and it's going to simplify a _lot_
of subsystems, infrastructure, tooling, design, architecture, etc, if they can
hand the same kernel to wearable device OEMs, phone/tablet OEMs, server OEMs,
IoT device OEMs, "nonexistent"/internal network equipment OEMs, consumer
network device OEMs; etc etc. This is a stretch and perhaps I'm looking ahead
more ambitiously than Google is here, but I'd be _very_ surprised if this
concept hasn't been floated. It's too attractive and makes too much sense.

I've been scared about Linux's future for a long time. It feels... _too_
successful, like things are going suspiciously well. I mean, right now I'm
typing this on a machine running an OS I didn't have to pay anybody for, and
if something breaks and makes me mad enough to want to do something about it,
there's more things I can take apart and things I can open and shut that will
fit in my attention span. And here's the bit that I'm suspicious about: that's
the status quo, what we've come to expect. We have it ridiculously easy!

I guess the reason I'm suspicious is because, I'm afraid the nice status quo
changing isn't a matter of _if_ but _when_ , and _when_ things fall apart, I
don't want to be taken by surprise.

It would be utterly foolish for me to try to envisage how this would happen;
the bazaar is WAY too big, sociopolitically speaking, for me to mentally model
it. Nope. But I feel (hand-wavily) that something's gotta give, eventually.
Not because of some concept of "where on earth is the fuel for all of this
free stuff coming from, and when will it run out" but more in terms of the
integrity of the fabric holding everything together, and how vulnerable that
is to change.

------
amaccuish
This whole thing reeks of personality cultism

------
SmellyGeekBoy
Betteridge's Law

~~~
tome
tome's law
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17978737](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17978737)

------
patrickg_zill
Linux has survived and thrived, garnering support from many big companies
without having to have a coc before.

That an admittedly mediocre tech-wise, and really quite odd person who
publicly hates meritocracy will now presume to sit in judgment of others who
have skills far greater than his, grates.

------
ofrzeta
I don't know about the end of Linux .. but I'd love to see Linus fork Linux
just to see who follows and how this turns out. He could certainly afford to
do it (economically and otherwise).

~~~
ofrzeta
No need for a downvote :) I have witnessed Linux' rise from nothing to the
dominating server OS. Back then there was a rich ecosystem of other Unix
systems that we used at my workplace (HP/UX, Digital Unix, Irix) and when we
started introducing Linux it was belittled for years as a toy until it was
finally accepted and slowly the other systems disappeared.

Now if Linux came to an end (I don't think so) or Linus started some new OS
project it wouldn't be the end of the world but the opportunity to start over
and create something new. Eternal recurrence and all that ..

