5 ms·

I think people like to dissect this too much. Your instincts, after millions of years of evolution, tell you all you need to know about a person. There is nothi

I think people like to dissect this too much. Your instincts, after millions of years of evolution, tell you all you need to know about a person. There is nothing "kind" about Linus, Bezos, Jobs, or even Gates for that matter. Grandmas tend to be kind, but these people are definitely not anywhere near that realm.

coldtea 9y ago
Bezos, Jobs and Gates may be not, but Linus might very well be kind. He doesn't take decisions that can screw thousands of people to his profit. Whether he would if he had that power, he didn't strive to get that power, and he doesn't have it, so while we can't rule it out, we also can tell that he isn't kind with any certainty. And surely he's not "unkind" just because he's famous or has a full mouth. That's not what kindness is about -- I know people 10 times as foul mouthed, that were real sweethearts and could give you a liver if you needed one.
- bamboozled 9y ago
  Agreed, he has given away his best work, to the world for free, which is an act of extreme kindness where I'm from. This is work that improves many lives.
  - branchless 9y ago
    Exactly, deeds are louder than words. Can you imagine what the world would be like without linux? He and Stallman deserve statues. They have given us our freedom. If we had to rely on microsoft and had no alternative could we get to sites that host anti-establishment views? We can never know, and need not go there thanks to these men.
    - eropple 9y ago
      Er. Linux is neat tech and all, but we had alternatives well before Linux existed. The rewriting of history is not necessary.
    - bamboozled 9y ago
      Yup, we also shouldn't forget Git, incredible software. I think Stallman is also a kind guy and the world is a better place for having him around. People say he is this and that, but I think some of his eccentric behaviour is just a survival mechanism.
    - smitherfield 9y ago
      > If we had to rely on microsoft and had no alternative could we get to sites that host anti-establishment views? This is a bit of an odd non-sequitur. Are you implying that the World Wide Web (1989) would not exist if not for Linux (1991)? Or that it would somehow be censored of all Microsoft criticism?
  - smitherfield 9y ago
    That's laying it on a bit thick. Linus is reportedly worth $40m+ — he's not living as a Stallman-like ascetic, refusing all compensation for his labors. Would he still be actively working on Linux 26 years later if it had never become popular enough for him to significantly monetize? I can't read his mind of course, but most open-source founders below the "companies pay you big bucks to work/consult on it" level do end up burning out and abandoning/leaving the project or taking a reduced role after a while. And of course even if he wanted to he couldn't have worked on it full-time, for obvious reasons. That's of course not to say he hasn't done an amazing job on Linux, or that he doesn't deserve particular praise for the first few years when he really was giving away his best work to the world for free.
    - coldtea 9y ago
      >That's laying it on a bit thick. Linus is reportedly worth $40m+ — he's not living as a Stallman-like ascetic, refusing all compensation for his labors. So? Who said he was ascetic (or should be)? What we said is that he gave the world his work for free. And while he might be worth "$40m+" the Linux industry he helped create and spearheaded is worth tens of billions (if not hundreds). Heck, Git products alone should be close to a billion. He could have easily gone for a slice of that pie early on, create branded proprietary lines of his software, etc, and it would have been a different landscape.
- theoh 9y ago
  I'm partial to thinking about this with Max Weber's idea of "charismatic authority". The charismatic leader gives things away, is popular -- being in favour is what charisma is all about -- but in an extreme instance of that climate, criticising the leader becomes dangerous. Luckily, in the case of Linux, the verdict of the user base (does it work?) provides a kind of guidance to Linus. But he knows ("git") that his personality is somehow more involved with this than it should be.

coldtea 9y ago

Bezos, Jobs and Gates may be not, but Linus might very well be kind. He doesn't take decisions that can screw thousands of people to his profit. Whether he would if he had that power, he didn't strive to get that power, and he doesn't have it, so while we can't rule it out, we also can tell that he isn't kind with any certainty. And surely he's not "unkind" just because he's famous or has a full mouth. That's not what kindness is about -- I know people 10 times as foul mouthed, that were real sweethearts and could give you a liver if you needed one.

bamboozled 9y ago
Agreed, he has given away his best work, to the world for free, which is an act of extreme kindness where I'm from. This is work that improves many lives.
- branchless 9y ago
  Exactly, deeds are louder than words. Can you imagine what the world would be like without linux? He and Stallman deserve statues. They have given us our freedom. If we had to rely on microsoft and had no alternative could we get to sites that host anti-establishment views? We can never know, and need not go there thanks to these men.
  - eropple 9y ago
    Er. Linux is neat tech and all, but we had alternatives well before Linux existed. The rewriting of history is not necessary.
  - bamboozled 9y ago
    Yup, we also shouldn't forget Git, incredible software. I think Stallman is also a kind guy and the world is a better place for having him around. People say he is this and that, but I think some of his eccentric behaviour is just a survival mechanism.
  - smitherfield 9y ago
    > If we had to rely on microsoft and had no alternative could we get to sites that host anti-establishment views? This is a bit of an odd non-sequitur. Are you implying that the World Wide Web (1989) would not exist if not for Linux (1991)? Or that it would somehow be censored of all Microsoft criticism?
- smitherfield 9y ago
  That's laying it on a bit thick. Linus is reportedly worth $40m+ — he's not living as a Stallman-like ascetic, refusing all compensation for his labors. Would he still be actively working on Linux 26 years later if it had never become popular enough for him to significantly monetize? I can't read his mind of course, but most open-source founders below the "companies pay you big bucks to work/consult on it" level do end up burning out and abandoning/leaving the project or taking a reduced role after a while. And of course even if he wanted to he couldn't have worked on it full-time, for obvious reasons. That's of course not to say he hasn't done an amazing job on Linux, or that he doesn't deserve particular praise for the first few years when he really was giving away his best work to the world for free.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >That's laying it on a bit thick. Linus is reportedly worth $40m+ — he's not living as a Stallman-like ascetic, refusing all compensation for his labors. So? Who said he was ascetic (or should be)? What we said is that he gave the world his work for free. And while he might be worth "$40m+" the Linux industry he helped create and spearheaded is worth tens of billions (if not hundreds). Heck, Git products alone should be close to a billion. He could have easily gone for a slice of that pie early on, create branded proprietary lines of his software, etc, and it would have been a different landscape.
theoh 9y ago
I'm partial to thinking about this with Max Weber's idea of "charismatic authority". The charismatic leader gives things away, is popular -- being in favour is what charisma is all about -- but in an extreme instance of that climate, criticising the leader becomes dangerous. Luckily, in the case of Linux, the verdict of the user base (does it work?) provides a kind of guidance to Linus. But he knows ("git") that his personality is somehow more involved with this than it should be.