Linux Developers Threaten to Pull "Kill Switch"

[R-T-B]

Like to think that but these people are getting the changes for crazy BS. For example New York has 31 genders now, sure it's going get worse. To think 31 more way's to offend people because, well how can you tell.

Most aren't going to give a shit beyond if you completly, repeatedly ignore their designation of choice. But that is honestly completely irrelevant to this discussion.

You can still offend people without even knowing.

Yeah? Ever heard of "Sorry?" That's really the universal answer to your problem.

I'n Autistic Spectrum and even I know this. You offend someone? Apologize. They still mad? Their problem, not yours.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

No, he's taking a break. I think he's aiming to learn how not to turn hostile.

Buuuuuutttt, back on topic: https://lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/

Additionally when said banned contributors joined the Linux team, they
were under the impression that it was a meritocracy: in-fact this belief
was stated or ratified by those within the governing body regarding
Linux when the contributors began their work (whatever that body was at
that time, it could have been simply Linus, or Linus and a few
associates).

Yeah...Killswitch indeed.

What it really boils down to is whether or not the Code of Conduct conflicts with the meritocracy commits were submitted as. I can't answer that. Only the contributors can. Linux could suffer a death by a thousand cuts if contributors feel it does.


Looking at the Code of Conduct, I see it as a normal business contract. In a business setting, you can't be attacking other members for any reason what-so-ever. Disputes need to be settled amicably, not forcfully. Yes, the preamble includes a lot of SJW keywords that, in my opinion, don't belong there but the meat of it is par for the course.

If the Code of Conduct is wielded as an instrument of social justice, then yes, developers will pull out and likely take their contributions with them.

 

[StrayKAT]

No, he's taking a break. I think he's aiming to learn how not to turn hostile.

edit:

Most aren't going to give a shit beyond if you completly, repeatedly ignore their designation of choice. But that is honestly completely irrelevant to this discussion.


Yeah? Ever heard of "Sorry?" That's really the universal answer to your problem.

I'n Autistic Spectrum and even I know this. You offend someone? Apologize. They still mad? Their problem, not yours.

Sorry isn't good enough. Linus apologized and now he's gone (for who knows how long).. and people are still mad, mocking his apology. Look up Twitter posts commenting on it.

In an ideal world, that would indeed be good enough. But hurt feelings isn't what this is really about anyways. It's about power.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Most aren't going to give a shit beyond if you completly, repeatedly ignore their designation of choice. But that is honestly completely irrelevant to this discussion.


Yeah? Ever heard of "Sorry?" That's really the universal answer to your problem.

I'n Autistic Spectrum and even I know this. You offend someone? Apologize. They still mad? Their problem, not yours.

I agree, the problem with saying Sorry is that it means swallowing a bit of pride. Than there is the crowd that takes the "I am better than you and that means I am right and you are wrong" approach, you can see this a lot here on TPU too. Yep no wants to say Sorry because it makes them look weak.

 

[R-T-B]

Sorry isn't good enough. Linus apologized and now he's gone (for who knows how long).. and people are still mad, mocking his apology. Look up Twitter posts commenting on it.

In an ideal world, that would indeed be good enough. But hurt feelings isn't what this is really about anyways. It's about power.

Linus talked the apology talk before. The issue here is his behavior has never changed. Thus the apology is hollow and means nothing.

 

[StrayKAT]

Linus talked the apology talk before. The issue here is his behavior has never changed. Thus the apology is hollow and means nothing.

He never should have apologized to begin with. Because it'll never be good enough. Now he's screwed.

If it ever got bad enough, people should have forked and did their own thing, shutting him out of that. He could have simply remained the jerk that he was, and the market would have shifted elsewhere.

Lets take the recently deceased Terry A Davis. The creator of TempleOS. This guy was completely off his rocker (schizophrenic), toxic on levels rarely seen... and thus, people didn't work with him.

Fair warning.. he was disgusting and offensive beyond words:

If Linus was so awful, he should have suffered the same lonely fate as this guy. But he wasn't. He's just bad enough to gripe about.. and destroy his project from the inside apparently. And now you have corporations with more power than he does at the moment. Good job.

 

[R-T-B]

He never should have apologized to begin with. Because it'll never be good enough. Now he's screwed.

I don't agree with that at all... but meh, believe what you will. Time will show the truth.

Good job.

Blame Linus, not those trying to pick up the pieces.

 

[StrayKAT]

I don't agree with that at all.

There's plenty of examples where apologizing just invites something worse. At least in these wider public spaces. Be it with developers, or celebrities, or politicians..

edit: Umm, looks like you edited. I'll just keep this here though. Just acknowledging that I read both posts.

 

[R-T-B]

I did ninja edit sorry.

All I'll say is the best defense is to make your apologies mean something. If you apologize repeteadly and change nothing "boy who cried wolf" theory does begin to work against you.

 

[StrayKAT]

lol.. Both of them in the same screen. A match made in.. hell?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

^ That is why he stepped away. Completely uncalled for and I think Linus realizes that now.

 

[Caring1]

Expecting someone on the spectrum to change their behaviours even though they know they can be offensive, is like expecting a depressed person to feel better after you tell them to cheer up.

 

[R-T-B]

Expecting someone on the spectrum to change their behaviours even though they know they can be offensive, is like expecting a depressed person to feel better after you tell them to cheer up.

True in certain aspects. But you know as well as I do some things can still be learned / behaviors modified. It's not like we're incapable of learning... heh.

Also, is Linus on the spectrum? That would surprise me.

 

[StrayKAT]

True in certain aspects. But you know as well as I do some things can still be learned / behaviors modified. It's not like we're incapable of learning... heh.

Also, is Linus on the spectrum? That would surprise me.

I don't know if anyone has said he was. I kind of think Jungian types could apply more.. He just seems to value thinking over emotional information. To me, it's more about lack of intelligence on that level. I don't think this always means someone is on the autism spectrum.

 

[R-T-B]

I don't know if anyone has said he was. I kind of think Jungian types could apply more.. He just seems to value thinking over emotional information. To me, it's more about lack of intelligence on that level. I don't think this always means someone is on the autism spectrum.

I may have read some implication that wasn't there in caring1's comment. Apologies.

 

[Solaris17]

Sorry isn't good enough. Linus apologized and now he's gone (for who knows how long).. and people are still mad, mocking his apology.

and who wouldt be? Linus may be the founding father but he is no saint. There are equally qualified core team members. The dude is straight hostile.

As for the CoC I'm not worried about it honestly. I agree with @FordGT90Concept I read the CoC and this is pretty standard. Not to mention givin the fluidity of linux if someone steps out then someone else that is willing to abide will step in to take the function on.

The reality is this affects Linux in almost no way. There wasnt drama to begin with from what little I've seen. Only the occasional rant by Linus on kernel commits. Not to mention again. Even if a bunch of devs leave they will just mainline fork. A pure mainline fork will probably only happen in the event of "mass walkout" which isn't likely but if it did happen they would more then likely just all go to the mainline fork that isn't overseen by the linux foundation.

and Lest we forget people like conical, suse, RHEL, BSD. Dont take upstream commits to core code as the gospel those modifications are looked over by there respective teams before being available in the REPOS.

 

[StrayKAT]

The dude is straight hostile.

I'm curious how many "missed opportunities" it created? What developer did he chase off.. that would have made Linux so much better? Seems like Linux has been fine under his leadership. More than fine. Something grown out of a dude's college dorm (or whatever) has managed to compete with billion dollar companies. What more do people want? He is a jerk, but he still valued good code. I'm sure he would have included things for that alone. If he didn't, there's probably a good reason for it...even if he's nasty about it.

edit:

And.... here we go already.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042769399596437504

A protest is brewing for Ted Tso, a kernel contributor.. for past comments that apparently make him a "rape apologist". Simply for being a typical egghead who was trying to group statistics on what constituted as rape or not.

As these things tend to go, I'm sure he's already guilty. Case closed. Goodbye Ted.. they'll just have to find another expert on filesystems....who works for free. They grow on trees.

 

[notb]

I have zero worries of this having any negative impact on Linux quality. In fact, I totally believe it''ll be very positive in the end.

Linus will fork the mainline and every normal thinking coder wanting to earn money will team up with him. The security patches will be pouring in Linus maintained fork and the money will start flowing into that fork from companies that use Linux.

More likely scenario: he forks, no one cares, he keeps being himself and is ostracized from the environment. And 20 years from now the new generation of coders doesn't know where the OS name came from.
Wouldn't it be better for both Linus and Linux, if he just moved aside and remain the "founding father"? You know... TEDx talks, college lectures, maybe some nice job at Google, Red Hat or Intel? Surely, there isn't a better candidate for some "Linux evangelist" position.

And money in Linux isn't that overwhelming much.

What?!

How you cannot become rude and use some strong words on some devs?

It's called propriety.
And Linus is really just a total opposite of how most Fins are. Too much fame? He wasn't always like that.

Linus does that, and I don't care as long it works out and is first of all FREE.

Well, eveyone is entitled to have an opinion.
I don't care for Linux being free. I'd gladly pay just as much as I pay for Windows, if it was so refined and offered the same level of compatibility.

I'm curious how many "missed opportunities" it created? What developer did he chase off.. that would have made Linux so much better? Seems like Linux has been fine under his leadership. More than fine. Something grown out of a dude's college dorm (or whatever) has managed to compete with billion dollar companies.

Linux hasn't been a competition for "billion dollar companies" almost from the moment it got popular. It's being driven by billion dollar companies.
The 2 largest contributors are Intel and Red Hat - they're responsible for 20-25% of changes.
Samsung, IBM and SUSE add another 10%. And the list goes on.
Non-corporate contributors are well below 10% now - less than half of the result from 2010.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'm curious how many "missed opportunities" it created? What developer did he chase off.. that would have made Linux so much better? Seems like Linux has been fine under his leadership. More than fine. Something grown out of a dude's college dorm (or whatever) has managed to compete with billion dollar companies. What more do people want? He is a jerk, but he still valued good code. I'm sure he would have included things for that alone. If he didn't, there's probably a good reason for it...even if he's nasty about it.

edit:

And.... here we go already.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042769399596437504

A protest is brewing for Ted Tso, a kernel contributor.. for past comments that apparently make him a "rape apologist". Simply for being a typical egghead who was trying to group statistics on what constituted as rape or not.

As these things tend to go, I'm sure he's already guilty. Case closed. Goodbye Ted.. they'll just have to find another expert on filesystems....who works for free. They grow on trees.

It backfired:

Calling someone a Rape Apologist is harassment and in violation of the new CoC..

Per the new Linux Code of Conduct, "unacceptable behavior" includes "insulting/derogatory comments" and "personal or political attacks". It seems to me as though calling another contributor a "rape apologist" fits both criteria.

Calling someone a "rape apologist" is insulting, derogatory, and personally attacking, especially publicly, and goes against the code of conduct.

They have as much reason to remove Sharp as they did Torvalds. Honestly, they need to. The only way to change the culture is to reprimand the people perpetrating it.

 

[StrayKAT]

It's already been pointed out that Sage Sharp is violating the Code of Conduct by calling Ted Tso a "rape apologist." Circular logic is circular.

Regardless if it succeeds or not, the fact that it's already even being used this way is the "weaponization" I was warning about. All you need is a big enough mob to get an issue rolling your way.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Linux foundation has to be careful, however, because the code could soon be filled with pot holes because of copyrights.


I think Ferrum Master was right. When Torvalds comes back, he's going to fork Linux. It's the only path forward I see working. Not unlike how Libre Office divorced itself from Oracle Inc. Linux needs to divorce itself from SJWs. I think that divorce also includes the Code of Conduct. I see it only existing to politicize and create a power struggle over commits. It's naturally hostile to the process of creating open source software. Some developers like Torvalds may be openly hostile to other contributors but the code he writes is for the collective good. As long as that remains the case, it fundamentally doesn't matter what demons Torvalds is dealing with. "No one likes to see how the sausage is made."

 

[AlwaysHope]

From bottom paragraph of that story.

"The Contributor Covenant is an agreement to implement a special Code of Conduct aimed at changing the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming. "

Death to meritocracy is what CoC is about. Get ready for even more bugs in code than what already is!

IF "white, straight, and male" is where the coding talent is.... then so be it. FFS, just want good code, get over that identity politics rubbish!

 

[rtwjunkie]

Sorry isn't good enough. Linus apologized and now he's gone (for who knows how long).. and people are still mad, mocking his apology

Maybe they feel his apology wasn’t sincere? Also, just giving an apology doesn’t always absolve someone of receiving some type of punitive action.

 

[StrayKAT]

From bottom paragraph of that story.

"The Contributor Covenant is an agreement to implement a special Code of Conduct aimed at changing the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming. "

Death to meritocracy is what CoC is about. Get ready for even more bugs in code than what already is!

IF "white, straight, and male" is where the coding talent is.... then so be it. FFS, just want good code, get over that identity politics rubbish!

I like the part where it argues against meritocracy because ONLY white, male programmers have enough free time to build their skills (privilege), and therefore "merit" is unfair.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Bare in mind that the Code of Conduct that was adopted was almost copied verbatim from Contributor Covenant's. I don't think the actual Code of Conduct is inflammatory but the language on Contributor Convenant's website is (basically an anti-meritocracy website that cites "Geek Feminist" as a source).


Let's take a closer look at what Sharp said: "One Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board member who did not sign off on the patch is Ted Tso, who is a rape apologist: [link to Geek Feminist definition of rape apologist]"

The way I read that is "I submitted a patch to remove words I consider bad to the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board and Ted Tso (one member of ten) didn't sign it. Guilty by omission! He's a rape apologist!"

So juvenile.


I looked more at Contributor Convenant's website and I don't see how this is a solution for anything. The intent is to end the meritocracy but behavior of contributors have little to do with which changes that are actually committed. There needs to be some form of consensus building and if it isn't meritocracy, what is it? The Code of Conduct doesn't answer that question. In an open source community, how can it even be binding? Someone has to render judgement on other contributors contributions and that's hardly a free environment. Here's the Code of Conflict that the Code of Conduct replaces. Code of Conduct basically just adds a lot of fluffy language that Code of Conflict summed up with "be excellent to each other." My understanding is that the meritocracy isn't going away and that's because LF-TAB has to keep corporate interests in mind.

So reading all of this stuff, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out what it all means. I'm coming up blank.