15 ms·

Linux developers threaten to pull “kill switch”

156 points by csense 8y ago

agentdrtran 8y ago
This is extremely slanted article.
otterley 8y ago
I think the headline is misleading: not a single developer has been identified who has threatened revoking their license to any contributed code, to the extent that it's even possible. As for whether it is actually possible, Eric Raymond has an _opinion_, but it's certainly not a legal one (he's not an attorney himself), and the issue has never been adjudicated AFAIK. (IAAL, but this is not legal advice.)
- Daishiman 8y ago
  ESR's opinions are the trash can of open source quackery. He hasn't said anything coherent or useful in this conversation since... ever.
jwilk 8y ago
Linux developers? Which ones exactly?
- esaym 8y ago
  You'll have to read the article...
  - jwilk 8y ago
    OK, I did. No names of such developers were mentioned there. Now what?
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      There never were any specific developers. The post was about what developers can do if they feel they are unfairly pushed out of the community by the new CoC. My take on the matter is that the Linux community in the past did a pretty good job of not accepting of talk of racism, misogyny, bigotry, and that this CoC will only be used as a political bludgeon.
      - pas 8y ago
        There was one big contributor saying the darndest things. But he recently realized this. So on one hand a CoC seems less needed now, but there were/are a lot of people very vocally defending that style.
- sagichmal 8y ago
  Exactly. Right-wing trolls stirring the pot. Don't give them the benefit of your attention.
  - LyndsySimon 8y ago
    Regardless of the messenger, take a look at the message. What would happen if a kernel developer were to withdraw the rights to their code? How would the community deal with that?
supernovae 8y ago
I hate this timeline...
xrd 8y ago
I'm as guilty as anyone of this, and is there anything in the CoCs that say something like "start by assuming the best of everyone involved?" Is that possible here?
chx 8y ago
Sigh. 1. Most of Linux is written by paid contributors. They won't leave. 2. Most of those who kindle this flamewar are not Linux contributors but the alt-right. They also got involved in the Larry Garfield-Drupal affair (which was extremely poorly communicated). 3. If I may offer an explanation on why Code of Conducts are important: https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-developer-who-got-banned-from-his-community-due-to-code-of-conduct-22d8f066ab9e https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-deve...
- Covzire 8y ago
  The alt-right, seriously?
  - confounded 8y ago
    Take a look at the rest of the stories on lulz.com It appears to be a right-wing outrage machine about black celebrities and feminists, targeted at young white North American men.
  - AdmiralAsshat 8y ago
    The email in question appears to originate from someone whose domain is "@redchan..." So, I'd say it's not inconceivable that the guy is alt-right.
    - huntie 8y ago
      It's not their website, redchan.it is one of many domains used by a free email service.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - jayess 8y ago
    Maybe we could throw Russia into the mix too.
    - 8y ago
Yaggo 8y ago
> A controversy over politics is now seeing some of its developers threatening to withdraw the license to all of their code, potentially destroying or making the whole Linux kernel unusable for a very long time. Interesting. I've been under impression that once you licence your code, you cannot "take it back" (for that particular version or release). https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5419923/can-gpl-be-re-licensed https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5419923/can-gpl-be-re-li...
- syn0byte 8y ago
  You can re-license it in such a way as to poison the GPL versions into uselessness. Hell, just reissue with GPLv3. That'll still kill it pretty well.
- wahern 8y ago
  Anyone who definitively tells you that it can or cannot be is not being honest. It's complicated; it's complicated in all the normal ways copyright and contract law are complicated, but compounded by (1) this being a murky, unexplored area of copyright and (2) the collaborative, open source code sharing model thriving in part based on legal ambiguity (e.g. collaboration incentivized when potential antagonists can each pretend the law favors their Plan B). As an example of the difficulty: U.S. Copyright gives authors absolute termination rights.[1][2] An author can unilaterally choose to terminate a license or transfer 35 years subsequent to the grant, but no more than 40 years after. A contract, promise, or some other contrivance executed to nullify the right is void, just like you can't willingly contract yourself into slavery. Which is to say, a court won't punish you in any way, shape, or form for statutory termination; and won't hear any arguments about reliance or other arguments intended to coax a court to enjoin termination. However, statutory termination requires notice to be given at least 2 years prior (but not more than 10 years prior) to termination. There are unresolved questions regarding notice and its effect. Many observers (including Stallman) are of the opinion that statutory termination rights are of little or no practical consequence to FOSS because of the technical requirements of notice, but arguably that's motivated thinking on their part. The types of termination being discussed in the context of the CoC involve more context-dependent questions of law and fact. If the practical effects of the most clear-cut and categorical route to termination are still left open, you can bet that other routes to termination pose significant unresolved questions and implications. [1] Statutory Termination: https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html#203 https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html#203 [2] Copyright Office's rules for effective notice: https://www.copyright.gov/title37/201/37cfr201-10.html https://www.copyright.gov/title37/201/37cfr201-10.html
benbristow 8y ago
I don't see why folk are getting so frustrated about this Code of Conduct. I'm far from a so-called SJW but to me it's just common sense written down and formalised. Examples of behavior that contributes to creating a positive environment include: Using welcoming and inclusive language Being respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences Gracefully accepting constructive criticism Focusing on what is best for the community Showing empathy towards other community members What is wrong here? Isn't this how any professional should act in the workplace? Why shouldn't this apply to one of the largest open source projects around? 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 Same here. Most of this is illegal and morally wrong to do inside (or even outside) the workplace too. Seems like a few people getting annoyed over nothing.
- jayess 8y ago
  > 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 These sorts of terms are impossible to define, so the decision to ban people comes down to personal, subjective interpretation. In the name of setting standards, there are no standards at all.
  - sagichmal 8y ago
    Yes, it's almost as if a body politic of human beings will have to exercise subjective judgment. Luckily, we humans are both capable of, and justified in, making these kinds of assessments.
  - matthewmacleod 8y ago
    Only in the sense that everything is subject to personal interpretation of those who are responsible for enforcing a set of rules. But wouldn't you agree that it's generally better to have a set of pretty clear guidelines that might not always be watertight, versus an _entirely_ personal, subjective set of inscrutable rules?
monksy 8y ago
This is going to be an interesting approach. On one hand I'm against the approach because it means that contributions that have been dependent on may just disappear. (Kind of anti-community) On the other hand: it gives the people who contribute work to the project leverage. People who contribute shouldn't be under threat of being bullied by this. Let's be honest, people who can just make up the rules about 'whats a violation' will abuse that power.
- matthewmacleod 8y ago
  Let's be honest, people who can just make up the rules about 'whats a violation' will abuse that power. The problem with that interpretation is that is already the situation, except to a much greater extent. People holding a position of power in a community inevitably have the ability to use that power and influence to affect the community, including restricting or removing participants. I struggle to see how the introduction of a set of pretty straightforward rules would make that situation worse. Indeed, one of the major reasons for introducing that set of rules is for somebody to be able to subsequently point at it, say "(bullying|privacy violations|personal attacks|sexual imagery) are not allowed here, please stop doing it".
alpb 8y ago
Mods please update the title. It’s clickbait to the extent everyone has to click it to learn what’s going on.
programmarchy 8y ago
It is odd that Theo T'so, who resisted introducing backdoors into /dev/random, was the first one targeted by the code of conduct. The allegations made against him are ludicrous. Smells like intelligence agencies using radicalized useful idiots to "take out" vigilant contributors, so they can get their backdoors through. It's worth keeping an eye on these areas of the kernel.
- adn 8y ago
  There's exactly 0 evidence of this.
  - rajaganesh87 8y ago
    There's exactly 0 investigation on this
    - meowface 8y ago
      What's there to investigate? What's more likely, that people obsessed with social justice latched onto a story about a guy who gave a clinical discussion about rape statistics [1], alleging him to be a rape apologist, or that there's a conspiracy by the US government to smear Linux contributors who don't like backdoors? [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_apology_on_LCA_mailing_list http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_apology_on_LCA_maili...
      - programmarchy 8y ago
        Those two scenarios are not mutually exclusive. For example, terrorists blow people up for religious reasons and states also fund them to attack their enemies.
        meowface 8y ago
        They're not mutually exclusive, but someone attempting to connect the two will have to provide some evidence. So far, I've not seen any from anyone. I mean, how exactly would this theory work? Intel/Microsoft/FBI/NSA is paying or fomenting "SJW trolls" to cause havoc and slander anyone who gets in their way of implementing a potential backdoor? What'll happen when they're up against cryptography contributors who are super progressive or have a "clean record"? To me this seems way more likely to be just typical social media outcry and hyperbole with nothing nefarious underneath it. And in this instance, it just happens to have affected someone involved with Linux cryptography.
KirinDave 8y ago
It's really, really unsurprising that ESR is at the heart of this. He's been extremely upset about being kicked out of various programming communities after deciding that his new life goal is redefine the stereotype, "Racist Old Uncle Who Totally Knows Kung Fu and Probably Invented All Modern Economics Independently." It's equally predictable that never-been-that-relevant Mark Kern is rabble-rousing for this, as that's practically his livelihood. In neither case should this really be mistaken for a wide-held sentiment. The problem with the project and license structure of Linux in 2018 is that literally any threat the relatively small number of neo-reactionary programmers can execute on can simply be paved over by various large corporations simply assigning more resources to pick up any slack. For them, ensuring continuity in Linux is both a public commitment and an business requirement. In other words: this is another ill-considered example of burning shoes you already bought in protest. Since most of substance of their work has already been turned over to the public consciousness, it's relatively straightforward to continue with that work or to replace it if a licensing conflict comes up. Doubly so since the actual slice of people who will put up this much of a fight over an agreement to adhere to professional standards is quite small.
- throwaway5250 8y ago
  I've been reading ESR for decades and have never noticed him saying anything racist. Can you provide a few examples? (And I suppose using "old" in this way is against the CoC?)
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    No, you can google "Eric S Raymond racist quote" and get a bunch of them. No way I'm gonna dip my eyes back into the metaphorical peroxide of that man's writing. I paid thousands upon thousands of dollars to the Great Slate to make tqbf stop putting those things in my eyeline, I am that happy to avoid that man.
  - cdcfa78156ae5 8y ago
    Here is a good example of ESR being racist: https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/816449724127608833 https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/816449724127608833 Here is an example of ESR being misogynist: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907
LinuxBender 8y ago
I have read this a few times, and it still is not clear to me who is trolling who here. Is this a mix of 4chan, or shills acting through 4chan, pretending to be SJW's? I thought most people left 4chan long ago. I have used the Covenant Code of Conduct [1] in my git repos for some time and I don't see how this has derailed into so much drama. [1] - https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-con...
sethish 8y ago
I appreciate this website trying to reach out to someone to see if this threat has teeth. But I don't trust RMS nor ESR to know the relevant law, not being lawers. And I don't trust ESR to be truthful when an issue aligns with his personal opinions.
kaendfinger 8y ago
Why do people in the name of diversity destroy everything they touch?
- ignoramceisblis 8y ago
  It's easier to destroy than to create. And there's a lot to be gained for a few when you take down one of the engines of progress of a society.
- pas 8y ago
  Some people do, some don't. (Of course the True Scotsmans are aware of the problem.)
chooseaname 8y ago
If they did this, what would make Linux devs any less evil than <pick a large company name>? Linux would lose a LOT of corporate support. You'd see businesses migrate [back] to Windows. You'd see support for Linux being dropped left and right. It would set Linux back _a decade_ if they did this. All because they don't want to grow as a person. This is the emotional equivalent of, "I'll just take my ball and go home!"
svrtknst 8y ago
This is... not an easy matter. To begin with, I wouldn't be surprised if this is fueled by fringe right wing interests, similar to GamerGate etc. Second, I am generally in favor of CoCs and changes that aim to elevate minority groups. Thirdly, it's often hard to take "we have no problems with diversity" at face value when it comes from those favored by a lack of CoCs. All that said - This, to me, seems like a hard call to make. An updated CoC seems great, and I agree wholeheartedly with the spirit of it, and the need for it. On the other hand, I find the lack of definition and process it entails problematic. Hopefully it's a "two steps forward, one step back" situation and not the other way around.
- svrtknst 8y ago
  Not be particularly salty, but Hacker News is not where I expected to face a slew of downvotes without commentary. Anyone care to point out what I said that was so offensive, or nah?
chris_mc 8y ago
HN is all about using this technique to fight "SJW" culture, but when that one guy tried to change his license to prevent military use of his code, everyone went fucking apeshit. Nice double standard by the privileged, right-wing masses. Edit: yes, please down vote my "liberal" view, snowflakes.
- ignoramceisblis 8y ago
  Yeah, those right-wing Nazi alt-right conservative asshole privileged straight white-skinned cis male apeshit warmongers. F* them! Man, that felt good! I hope I get some honest positive reinforcement from my peers--and not bots--to continue this roll that I'm on. I'm too wrapped up in this identity to stop it now! WAR is f*ing GREAT!
  - dang 8y ago
    You've been breaking the HN guidelines by using this site primarily for ideological battle. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of which ideology they're battling for. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended from now on, we'd appreciate it. All: there are probably a lot more accounts who have been doing this than we're aware of. If you see one that hasn't been moderated, the likely explanation is not that we secretly agree with that account, but that we haven't seen it yet. Users who aren't above informing on their ideological enemies are free to let us know about them. If you're unclear on the moderation standard and why the word 'primarily' is our test for drawing the line on this, see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:dang%20primarily%20line https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....
    - ignoramceisblis 8y ago
      I use this site primarily for seeing aggregated news related to tech, not for ideological battle. When I see hypocrisy, misconceptions, lies, and faulty logic being spread and promoted, when some rational and opposing voices are routinely shut out, I sometimes decide to make a comment in an attempt to point out this out. If you consider me doing this "ideological battle", instead of abusing the "flag" button like others on this site do, you are woefully mistaken. Yes, very rarely do I bite back with a kind of venom that others spread. This comment of mine that you've chosen to respond to is in response to another user's comment who grossly misrepresented a group of people as "fucking apeshit" "double standard"-applying "privileged, right-wing" individuals. So I chose to mimic their verbage and point out the hypocrisy in their thinking. Honestly suspecting there might be a chance they catch on. Yet their comment appeared untouched while mine was flagged. And here I am, now being told I've been breaking the guidelines. I've reviewed the guidelines. They're not applied even-handedly. Abusers liberally use the flag mechanism for their own ideological battles, and the lens with which you view comments for moderation is distorted. I've checked your link for your 'primarily' test, and no results show. Like I've stated, I use this site primarily for seeing aggregated news, and sometimes, when I see bullshit, I point it out.
cdcfa78156ae5 8y ago
This is trolling by people who do not understand the GPLv2, and has happened before. Someone had the "brilliant idea" of "retroactively revoking" the GPLv2 a decade ago (2008): http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006062204552163 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006062204552163 You cannot do it. The only way the right to distribute GPLv2 software gets revoked is for a specific party that distributes a GPLv2 licensed work in violation of the GPLv2 distribution terms.
erikb 8y ago
I hope so much that we find out what the actual political game here is. That this kind of stuff happens now, shortly after Linus takes a break, is not a coincidence. That has been growing there for quite some time. But who and why? I don't know yet and am happy for any hint.
newnewpdro 8y ago
More mountains out of molehills. LKML has been relatively quiet if you consider the number of subscribers on that list. There's basically a few ambulance chasers trying to drum up business, and pretty much everyone involved knows to ignore them. But that won't stop folks from trying to generate views, clicks, followers, etc. by reporting on and exaggerating the practically nonexistent situation. Also, Unrelated ESR story: In my teens my LUG saw him visit our regular meeting while he was in town for some other event, back in the 90s when linux was on a hype wave. We all went, as we normally did, to a group dinner afterwards. He and his guest straight up vanished on us before the bill came. I don't even know what he came for, he didn't tell or show us anything interesting. He behaved like a celebrity and forced a small group of broke kids to have to pay for him and his guest's meals. I don't even know how we managed to scrounge up the money, I certainly didn't have it. ESR can go f*ck himself.
busterarm 8y ago
I want to sidestep all of the usual back and forth debates in this and point out something that really stuck in my craw... > 2. Lack of CC’s CoC sustains meritocracy, which “has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology“. [http://archive.is/o2OzZ http://archive.is/o2OzZ] What is this bullshit idea that the beneficiaries of open source software are those that contributed as opposed to from being able to use it? Good commits benefit everyone. The idea that someone(s) would block a person's commit based on some non-code distinction, to the detriment of everyone who uses that software...which possibly also includes the other people contributing to it...is completely ludicrous.

156 points by csense 8y ago

This is extremely slanted article.

I think the headline is misleading: not a single developer has been identified who has threatened revoking their license to any contributed code, to the extent that it's even possible. As for whether it is actually possible, Eric Raymond has an _opinion_, but it's certainly not a legal one (he's not an attorney himself), and the issue has never been adjudicated AFAIK. (IAAL, but this is not legal advice.)

Daishiman 8y ago
ESR's opinions are the trash can of open source quackery. He hasn't said anything coherent or useful in this conversation since... ever.

jwilk 8y ago

Linux developers? Which ones exactly?

esaym 8y ago
You'll have to read the article...
- jwilk 8y ago
  OK, I did. No names of such developers were mentioned there. Now what?
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    There never were any specific developers. The post was about what developers can do if they feel they are unfairly pushed out of the community by the new CoC. My take on the matter is that the Linux community in the past did a pretty good job of not accepting of talk of racism, misogyny, bigotry, and that this CoC will only be used as a political bludgeon.
    - pas 8y ago
      There was one big contributor saying the darndest things. But he recently realized this. So on one hand a CoC seems less needed now, but there were/are a lot of people very vocally defending that style.
sagichmal 8y ago
Exactly. Right-wing trolls stirring the pot. Don't give them the benefit of your attention.
- LyndsySimon 8y ago
  Regardless of the messenger, take a look at the message. What would happen if a kernel developer were to withdraw the rights to their code? How would the community deal with that?

supernovae 8y ago

I hate this timeline...

xrd 8y ago

I'm as guilty as anyone of this, and is there anything in the CoCs that say something like "start by assuming the best of everyone involved?" Is that possible here?

chx 8y ago

Sigh. 1. Most of Linux is written by paid contributors. They won't leave. 2. Most of those who kindle this flamewar are not Linux contributors but the alt-right. They also got involved in the Larry Garfield-Drupal affair (which was extremely poorly communicated). 3. If I may offer an explanation on why Code of Conducts are important: https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-developer-who-got-banned-from-his-community-due-to-code-of-conduct-22d8f066ab9e https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-deve...

Covzire 8y ago
The alt-right, seriously?
- confounded 8y ago
  Take a look at the rest of the stories on lulz.com It appears to be a right-wing outrage machine about black celebrities and feminists, targeted at young white North American men.
- AdmiralAsshat 8y ago
  The email in question appears to originate from someone whose domain is "@redchan..." So, I'd say it's not inconceivable that the guy is alt-right.
  - huntie 8y ago
    It's not their website, redchan.it is one of many domains used by a free email service.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- jayess 8y ago
  Maybe we could throw Russia into the mix too.
  - 8y ago

Yaggo 8y ago

> A controversy over politics is now seeing some of its developers threatening to withdraw the license to all of their code, potentially destroying or making the whole Linux kernel unusable for a very long time. Interesting. I've been under impression that once you licence your code, you cannot "take it back" (for that particular version or release). https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5419923/can-gpl-be-re-licensed https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5419923/can-gpl-be-re-li...

syn0byte 8y ago
You can re-license it in such a way as to poison the GPL versions into uselessness. Hell, just reissue with GPLv3. That'll still kill it pretty well.
wahern 8y ago
Anyone who definitively tells you that it can or cannot be is not being honest. It's complicated; it's complicated in all the normal ways copyright and contract law are complicated, but compounded by (1) this being a murky, unexplored area of copyright and (2) the collaborative, open source code sharing model thriving in part based on legal ambiguity (e.g. collaboration incentivized when potential antagonists can each pretend the law favors their Plan B). As an example of the difficulty: U.S. Copyright gives authors absolute termination rights.[1][2] An author can unilaterally choose to terminate a license or transfer 35 years subsequent to the grant, but no more than 40 years after. A contract, promise, or some other contrivance executed to nullify the right is void, just like you can't willingly contract yourself into slavery. Which is to say, a court won't punish you in any way, shape, or form for statutory termination; and won't hear any arguments about reliance or other arguments intended to coax a court to enjoin termination. However, statutory termination requires notice to be given at least 2 years prior (but not more than 10 years prior) to termination. There are unresolved questions regarding notice and its effect. Many observers (including Stallman) are of the opinion that statutory termination rights are of little or no practical consequence to FOSS because of the technical requirements of notice, but arguably that's motivated thinking on their part. The types of termination being discussed in the context of the CoC involve more context-dependent questions of law and fact. If the practical effects of the most clear-cut and categorical route to termination are still left open, you can bet that other routes to termination pose significant unresolved questions and implications. [1] Statutory Termination: https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html#203 https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html#203 [2] Copyright Office's rules for effective notice: https://www.copyright.gov/title37/201/37cfr201-10.html https://www.copyright.gov/title37/201/37cfr201-10.html

benbristow 8y ago

I don't see why folk are getting so frustrated about this Code of Conduct. I'm far from a so-called SJW but to me it's just common sense written down and formalised. Examples of behavior that contributes to creating a positive environment include: Using welcoming and inclusive language Being respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences Gracefully accepting constructive criticism Focusing on what is best for the community Showing empathy towards other community members What is wrong here? Isn't this how any professional should act in the workplace? Why shouldn't this apply to one of the largest open source projects around? 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 Same here. Most of this is illegal and morally wrong to do inside (or even outside) the workplace too. Seems like a few people getting annoyed over nothing.

jayess 8y ago
> 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 These sorts of terms are impossible to define, so the decision to ban people comes down to personal, subjective interpretation. In the name of setting standards, there are no standards at all.
- sagichmal 8y ago
  Yes, it's almost as if a body politic of human beings will have to exercise subjective judgment. Luckily, we humans are both capable of, and justified in, making these kinds of assessments.
- matthewmacleod 8y ago
  Only in the sense that everything is subject to personal interpretation of those who are responsible for enforcing a set of rules. But wouldn't you agree that it's generally better to have a set of pretty clear guidelines that might not always be watertight, versus an _entirely_ personal, subjective set of inscrutable rules?

monksy 8y ago

This is going to be an interesting approach. On one hand I'm against the approach because it means that contributions that have been dependent on may just disappear. (Kind of anti-community) On the other hand: it gives the people who contribute work to the project leverage. People who contribute shouldn't be under threat of being bullied by this. Let's be honest, people who can just make up the rules about 'whats a violation' will abuse that power.

matthewmacleod 8y ago
Let's be honest, people who can just make up the rules about 'whats a violation' will abuse that power. The problem with that interpretation is that is already the situation, except to a much greater extent. People holding a position of power in a community inevitably have the ability to use that power and influence to affect the community, including restricting or removing participants. I struggle to see how the introduction of a set of pretty straightforward rules would make that situation worse. Indeed, one of the major reasons for introducing that set of rules is for somebody to be able to subsequently point at it, say "(bullying|privacy violations|personal attacks|sexual imagery) are not allowed here, please stop doing it".

alpb 8y ago

Mods please update the title. It’s clickbait to the extent everyone has to click it to learn what’s going on.

programmarchy 8y ago

It is odd that Theo T'so, who resisted introducing backdoors into /dev/random, was the first one targeted by the code of conduct. The allegations made against him are ludicrous. Smells like intelligence agencies using radicalized useful idiots to "take out" vigilant contributors, so they can get their backdoors through. It's worth keeping an eye on these areas of the kernel.

adn 8y ago
There's exactly 0 evidence of this.
- rajaganesh87 8y ago
  There's exactly 0 investigation on this
  - meowface 8y ago
    What's there to investigate? What's more likely, that people obsessed with social justice latched onto a story about a guy who gave a clinical discussion about rape statistics [1], alleging him to be a rape apologist, or that there's a conspiracy by the US government to smear Linux contributors who don't like backdoors? [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_apology_on_LCA_mailing_list http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_apology_on_LCA_maili...
    - programmarchy 8y ago
      Those two scenarios are not mutually exclusive. For example, terrorists blow people up for religious reasons and states also fund them to attack their enemies.
      - meowface 8y ago
        They're not mutually exclusive, but someone attempting to connect the two will have to provide some evidence. So far, I've not seen any from anyone. I mean, how exactly would this theory work? Intel/Microsoft/FBI/NSA is paying or fomenting "SJW trolls" to cause havoc and slander anyone who gets in their way of implementing a potential backdoor? What'll happen when they're up against cryptography contributors who are super progressive or have a "clean record"? To me this seems way more likely to be just typical social media outcry and hyperbole with nothing nefarious underneath it. And in this instance, it just happens to have affected someone involved with Linux cryptography.

KirinDave 8y ago

It's really, really unsurprising that ESR is at the heart of this. He's been extremely upset about being kicked out of various programming communities after deciding that his new life goal is redefine the stereotype, "Racist Old Uncle Who Totally Knows Kung Fu and Probably Invented All Modern Economics Independently." It's equally predictable that never-been-that-relevant Mark Kern is rabble-rousing for this, as that's practically his livelihood. In neither case should this really be mistaken for a wide-held sentiment. The problem with the project and license structure of Linux in 2018 is that literally any threat the relatively small number of neo-reactionary programmers can execute on can simply be paved over by various large corporations simply assigning more resources to pick up any slack. For them, ensuring continuity in Linux is both a public commitment and an business requirement. In other words: this is another ill-considered example of burning shoes you already bought in protest. Since most of substance of their work has already been turned over to the public consciousness, it's relatively straightforward to continue with that work or to replace it if a licensing conflict comes up. Doubly so since the actual slice of people who will put up this much of a fight over an agreement to adhere to professional standards is quite small.

throwaway5250 8y ago
I've been reading ESR for decades and have never noticed him saying anything racist. Can you provide a few examples? (And I suppose using "old" in this way is against the CoC?)
- KirinDave 8y ago
  No, you can google "Eric S Raymond racist quote" and get a bunch of them. No way I'm gonna dip my eyes back into the metaphorical peroxide of that man's writing. I paid thousands upon thousands of dollars to the Great Slate to make tqbf stop putting those things in my eyeline, I am that happy to avoid that man.
- cdcfa78156ae5 8y ago
  Here is a good example of ESR being racist: https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/816449724127608833 https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/816449724127608833 Here is an example of ESR being misogynist: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907

LinuxBender 8y ago

I have read this a few times, and it still is not clear to me who is trolling who here. Is this a mix of 4chan, or shills acting through 4chan, pretending to be SJW's? I thought most people left 4chan long ago. I have used the Covenant Code of Conduct [1] in my git repos for some time and I don't see how this has derailed into so much drama. [1] - https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-con...

sethish 8y ago

I appreciate this website trying to reach out to someone to see if this threat has teeth. But I don't trust RMS nor ESR to know the relevant law, not being lawers. And I don't trust ESR to be truthful when an issue aligns with his personal opinions.

kaendfinger 8y ago

Why do people in the name of diversity destroy everything they touch?

ignoramceisblis 8y ago
It's easier to destroy than to create. And there's a lot to be gained for a few when you take down one of the engines of progress of a society.
pas 8y ago
Some people do, some don't. (Of course the True Scotsmans are aware of the problem.)

chooseaname 8y ago

If they did this, what would make Linux devs any less evil than <pick a large company name>? Linux would lose a LOT of corporate support. You'd see businesses migrate [back] to Windows. You'd see support for Linux being dropped left and right. It would set Linux back _a decade_ if they did this. All because they don't want to grow as a person. This is the emotional equivalent of, "I'll just take my ball and go home!"

svrtknst 8y ago

This is... not an easy matter. To begin with, I wouldn't be surprised if this is fueled by fringe right wing interests, similar to GamerGate etc. Second, I am generally in favor of CoCs and changes that aim to elevate minority groups. Thirdly, it's often hard to take "we have no problems with diversity" at face value when it comes from those favored by a lack of CoCs. All that said - This, to me, seems like a hard call to make. An updated CoC seems great, and I agree wholeheartedly with the spirit of it, and the need for it. On the other hand, I find the lack of definition and process it entails problematic. Hopefully it's a "two steps forward, one step back" situation and not the other way around.

svrtknst 8y ago
Not be particularly salty, but Hacker News is not where I expected to face a slew of downvotes without commentary. Anyone care to point out what I said that was so offensive, or nah?

chris_mc 8y ago

HN is all about using this technique to fight "SJW" culture, but when that one guy tried to change his license to prevent military use of his code, everyone went fucking apeshit. Nice double standard by the privileged, right-wing masses. Edit: yes, please down vote my "liberal" view, snowflakes.

ignoramceisblis 8y ago
Yeah, those right-wing Nazi alt-right conservative asshole privileged straight white-skinned cis male apeshit warmongers. F* them! Man, that felt good! I hope I get some honest positive reinforcement from my peers--and not bots--to continue this roll that I'm on. I'm too wrapped up in this identity to stop it now! WAR is f*ing GREAT!
- dang 8y ago
  You've been breaking the HN guidelines by using this site primarily for ideological battle. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of which ideology they're battling for. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended from now on, we'd appreciate it. All: there are probably a lot more accounts who have been doing this than we're aware of. If you see one that hasn't been moderated, the likely explanation is not that we secretly agree with that account, but that we haven't seen it yet. Users who aren't above informing on their ideological enemies are free to let us know about them. If you're unclear on the moderation standard and why the word 'primarily' is our test for drawing the line on this, see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:dang%20primarily%20line https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....
  - ignoramceisblis 8y ago
    I use this site primarily for seeing aggregated news related to tech, not for ideological battle. When I see hypocrisy, misconceptions, lies, and faulty logic being spread and promoted, when some rational and opposing voices are routinely shut out, I sometimes decide to make a comment in an attempt to point out this out. If you consider me doing this "ideological battle", instead of abusing the "flag" button like others on this site do, you are woefully mistaken. Yes, very rarely do I bite back with a kind of venom that others spread. This comment of mine that you've chosen to respond to is in response to another user's comment who grossly misrepresented a group of people as "fucking apeshit" "double standard"-applying "privileged, right-wing" individuals. So I chose to mimic their verbage and point out the hypocrisy in their thinking. Honestly suspecting there might be a chance they catch on. Yet their comment appeared untouched while mine was flagged. And here I am, now being told I've been breaking the guidelines. I've reviewed the guidelines. They're not applied even-handedly. Abusers liberally use the flag mechanism for their own ideological battles, and the lens with which you view comments for moderation is distorted. I've checked your link for your 'primarily' test, and no results show. Like I've stated, I use this site primarily for seeing aggregated news, and sometimes, when I see bullshit, I point it out.

cdcfa78156ae5 8y ago

This is trolling by people who do not understand the GPLv2, and has happened before. Someone had the "brilliant idea" of "retroactively revoking" the GPLv2 a decade ago (2008): http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006062204552163 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006062204552163 You cannot do it. The only way the right to distribute GPLv2 software gets revoked is for a specific party that distributes a GPLv2 licensed work in violation of the GPLv2 distribution terms.

erikb 8y ago

I hope so much that we find out what the actual political game here is. That this kind of stuff happens now, shortly after Linus takes a break, is not a coincidence. That has been growing there for quite some time. But who and why? I don't know yet and am happy for any hint.

newnewpdro 8y ago

More mountains out of molehills. LKML has been relatively quiet if you consider the number of subscribers on that list. There's basically a few ambulance chasers trying to drum up business, and pretty much everyone involved knows to ignore them. But that won't stop folks from trying to generate views, clicks, followers, etc. by reporting on and exaggerating the practically nonexistent situation. Also, Unrelated ESR story: In my teens my LUG saw him visit our regular meeting while he was in town for some other event, back in the 90s when linux was on a hype wave. We all went, as we normally did, to a group dinner afterwards. He and his guest straight up vanished on us before the bill came. I don't even know what he came for, he didn't tell or show us anything interesting. He behaved like a celebrity and forced a small group of broke kids to have to pay for him and his guest's meals. I don't even know how we managed to scrounge up the money, I certainly didn't have it. ESR can go f*ck himself.

busterarm 8y ago

I want to sidestep all of the usual back and forth debates in this and point out something that really stuck in my craw... > 2. Lack of CC’s CoC sustains meritocracy, which “has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology“. [http://archive.is/o2OzZ http://archive.is/o2OzZ] What is this bullshit idea that the beneficiaries of open source software are those that contributed as opposed to from being able to use it? Good commits benefit everyone. The idea that someone(s) would block a person's commit based on some non-code distinction, to the detriment of everyone who uses that software...which possibly also includes the other people contributing to it...is completely ludicrous.