7 ms·

> I never thought Linus was in bad form. His project, his rules. I think this is a problematic way to view things. Linus was usually right on the technical as

> I never thought Linus was in bad form. His project, his rules. I think this is a problematic way to view things. Linus was usually right on the technical aspects, but he often made personal insults that were really just irrelevant. There's no need to attack people personally to get your point across. Honestly, his attitude in many of those famous comments strikes me as immature — he presents himself as someone who would rather spend time berating a person who tried to make a contribution and didn't do a good job than simply explaining why their contribution isn't good enough. Sure, "his project, his rules", but that doesn't give him carte blanche to be a dick to people without any repercussions. Just as he is entitled to speak his mind, so too are the people who felt that his comments were out of line.

coolso 8y ago
> problematic There’s that word. I find its prevalent use in modern times to be problematic.
- munchbunny 8y ago
  What would you suggest to convey the same meaning of "making something/someone unnecessarily painful to deal with"?
  - coolso 8y ago
    There’s got to be another word that doesn’t make the user come across like someone who seems deeply proud and smug about the fact that they perceive themselves to be on the moral high ground about a particular issue, while simultaneously “tsk tsk”ing and shaming the person for something that, 9/10 times isn’t as dramatically as big a deal as the person using that word implies. In some instances sure it’s fitting, but here? Give me a break!
    - DonaldPShimoda 8y ago
      Uh well I was really just using it to mean "I don't like this take, and I think that we will have significant problems if too many people adopt the same point of view." Like just that that kind of point of view can cause problems in a community, because giving someone like Linus a free ride to say whatever he wants "because it's his house" can lead to a large portion of people feeling alienated or otherwise unfairly put-upon. I was unaware that the word "problematic" had so much extra connotation for some people. I'll seek to find an alternative way to phrase similar sentiments in the future. My immediate alternate choice would be "troublesome", but then that sounds patronizing (because kids are often seen as "troublesome"). Do you have some suggestions, maybe? (I know that sometimes when I write things like this people think I'm being sarcastic or antagonizing. I want you to know that this is not the case: I'm sincerely interested in finding another way to phrase these thoughts that will be less likely to cause these kinds of reactions in the future. I want to be understood clearly, but I don't want to mischaracterize my own opinions by using words that people may interpret with some nuance different than what I'm used to.)
    - andrepd 8y ago
      But that's you projecting the meaning you want on a word that does not have that connotation.
    - pwinnski 8y ago
      Whatever word you would suggest as an alternative today would soon enough sound just like "problematic" to you now. Your objection isn't really the word, but the idea.
      - erik_seaberg 8y ago
        "Problematic" alludes to a problem without concretely identifying it for us to decide how serious it is.
maccio92 8y ago
If you walk into my house, or request entry, I can treat you however I like. It's my house, my property. If you don't like it go somewhere else. We are all individuals. If he wants to be angry and make personal insults then people can choose not to interact with him or the things he works on. It should go no further than that.
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  >If he wants to be angry and make personal insults then people can choose not to interact with him or the things he works on They did. Enough people said "hey if you keep behaving this way we will no longer want to interact with you or the things you work with" that Linus stopped acting that way. It went no further than that.
- mj_olnir 8y ago
  And that's, in essence, what's happening...? People are saying that "we will not work with you unless you stop being an asshole". It's just happening at the organizational level. Linus is more than free to say whatever he likes, and people are also free to tell him to buzz off. That's how the rest of the world works.
- m00x 8y ago
  This project influences a ton of people, and if we have a lot of contributors going somewhere else, we'll lose progress we could have gotten otherwise. Linux is bigger than he is now, progress on it helps millions of people directly or indirectly. Think of it more like a company instead of a house. The founder doesn't have free reign to do whatever he wants to his employees. Everyone deserves to be treated respectfully, regardless of the situation.
- tonyarkles 8y ago
  I both agree with you, and disagree. Using your analogy... you've got 20,000 guests over at your house, and a bunch of them are telling you that you're being an asshole. You like the party you're having, and want to keep the party going. Do you listen to them and consider that there might be some validity to what they're saying? Or kick them out? There's nothing saying that he must listen to them, but it's pragmatically probably a good idea.
BrainInAJar 8y ago
"Linus was usually right on the technical aspects" Memory overcommit. OOM killer. "Security is just a bunch of masturbating monkeys" Linus is frequently extremely wrong on the technical aspects, in addition to being a huge jerk
Nicksil 8y ago
> he often made personal insults Was it often? I was never an ardent follower of his -- I primarily work in another field -- so I certainly haven't read or listened to all he's said. I did catch those handful of instances where he rocked the boat, but I don't recall the personal insults. Obviously that isn't to say it never occurred, but I'm wondering if he personally insulted people as often as you state.
- staticassertion 8y ago
  Yeah, it used to be way more often > a decade ago. Most of the famous rants people know of are from more recently, and are fairly insulting. I don't store old mailing lists, but the thing I generally point to is his statements towards the security community and, back then, specifically PaX team. I've stumbled on tons of personal attacks from him, either escalating an already negative conversation, or starting it himself. I also challenge the "usually right". To my knowledge, Linus is quite often wrong. And that's fine, really, everyone is wrong a lot of the time. But hero worship, or feeling the need to excuse his behavior even somewhat due to a false sense that it's helping things, is not a good idea.
nabla9 8y ago
Insults are technically irrelevant but aggressive tone one proven way to manage open and popular projects (it's not the only one). The problem with successful open source projects like Linux is not lack of good people, it's too many people wanting to contribute and push their ideas. Increasing the emotional stakes for committing, commenting or contributing helps. If your heart starts pounding before you press send, and you decide to read and think it again, the quality of communication and contributions increases. Insulting someone is not as bad as politely not engaging. "Than you for participating." There is very popular and extremely PC open source project where the leadership politely avoids conflict. You try to push new ideas, corrections and features and the leaders never explains what is wrong with them or where they stand on things. People waste years before they realize that there is invincible barrier and passive-aggressive culture. ps. I think SJW's have their place when the insults become gender based and diverge from the technical aspects. Linus-type leadership can evoke copycat behaviour that is not called for.

coolso 8y ago

> problematic There’s that word. I find its prevalent use in modern times to be problematic.

munchbunny 8y ago
What would you suggest to convey the same meaning of "making something/someone unnecessarily painful to deal with"?
- coolso 8y ago
  There’s got to be another word that doesn’t make the user come across like someone who seems deeply proud and smug about the fact that they perceive themselves to be on the moral high ground about a particular issue, while simultaneously “tsk tsk”ing and shaming the person for something that, 9/10 times isn’t as dramatically as big a deal as the person using that word implies. In some instances sure it’s fitting, but here? Give me a break!
  - DonaldPShimoda 8y ago
    Uh well I was really just using it to mean "I don't like this take, and I think that we will have significant problems if too many people adopt the same point of view." Like just that that kind of point of view can cause problems in a community, because giving someone like Linus a free ride to say whatever he wants "because it's his house" can lead to a large portion of people feeling alienated or otherwise unfairly put-upon. I was unaware that the word "problematic" had so much extra connotation for some people. I'll seek to find an alternative way to phrase similar sentiments in the future. My immediate alternate choice would be "troublesome", but then that sounds patronizing (because kids are often seen as "troublesome"). Do you have some suggestions, maybe? (I know that sometimes when I write things like this people think I'm being sarcastic or antagonizing. I want you to know that this is not the case: I'm sincerely interested in finding another way to phrase these thoughts that will be less likely to cause these kinds of reactions in the future. I want to be understood clearly, but I don't want to mischaracterize my own opinions by using words that people may interpret with some nuance different than what I'm used to.)
  - andrepd 8y ago
    But that's you projecting the meaning you want on a word that does not have that connotation.
  - pwinnski 8y ago
    Whatever word you would suggest as an alternative today would soon enough sound just like "problematic" to you now. Your objection isn't really the word, but the idea.
    - erik_seaberg 8y ago
      "Problematic" alludes to a problem without concretely identifying it for us to decide how serious it is.

maccio92 8y ago

If you walk into my house, or request entry, I can treat you however I like. It's my house, my property. If you don't like it go somewhere else. We are all individuals. If he wants to be angry and make personal insults then people can choose not to interact with him or the things he works on. It should go no further than that.

joshuamorton 8y ago
>If he wants to be angry and make personal insults then people can choose not to interact with him or the things he works on They did. Enough people said "hey if you keep behaving this way we will no longer want to interact with you or the things you work with" that Linus stopped acting that way. It went no further than that.
mj_olnir 8y ago
And that's, in essence, what's happening...? People are saying that "we will not work with you unless you stop being an asshole". It's just happening at the organizational level. Linus is more than free to say whatever he likes, and people are also free to tell him to buzz off. That's how the rest of the world works.
m00x 8y ago
This project influences a ton of people, and if we have a lot of contributors going somewhere else, we'll lose progress we could have gotten otherwise. Linux is bigger than he is now, progress on it helps millions of people directly or indirectly. Think of it more like a company instead of a house. The founder doesn't have free reign to do whatever he wants to his employees. Everyone deserves to be treated respectfully, regardless of the situation.
tonyarkles 8y ago
I both agree with you, and disagree. Using your analogy... you've got 20,000 guests over at your house, and a bunch of them are telling you that you're being an asshole. You like the party you're having, and want to keep the party going. Do you listen to them and consider that there might be some validity to what they're saying? Or kick them out? There's nothing saying that he must listen to them, but it's pragmatically probably a good idea.

BrainInAJar 8y ago

"Linus was usually right on the technical aspects" Memory overcommit. OOM killer. "Security is just a bunch of masturbating monkeys" Linus is frequently extremely wrong on the technical aspects, in addition to being a huge jerk

Nicksil 8y ago

> he often made personal insults Was it often? I was never an ardent follower of his -- I primarily work in another field -- so I certainly haven't read or listened to all he's said. I did catch those handful of instances where he rocked the boat, but I don't recall the personal insults. Obviously that isn't to say it never occurred, but I'm wondering if he personally insulted people as often as you state.

staticassertion 8y ago
Yeah, it used to be way more often > a decade ago. Most of the famous rants people know of are from more recently, and are fairly insulting. I don't store old mailing lists, but the thing I generally point to is his statements towards the security community and, back then, specifically PaX team. I've stumbled on tons of personal attacks from him, either escalating an already negative conversation, or starting it himself. I also challenge the "usually right". To my knowledge, Linus is quite often wrong. And that's fine, really, everyone is wrong a lot of the time. But hero worship, or feeling the need to excuse his behavior even somewhat due to a false sense that it's helping things, is not a good idea.

nabla9 8y ago

Insults are technically irrelevant but aggressive tone one proven way to manage open and popular projects (it's not the only one). The problem with successful open source projects like Linux is not lack of good people, it's too many people wanting to contribute and push their ideas. Increasing the emotional stakes for committing, commenting or contributing helps. If your heart starts pounding before you press send, and you decide to read and think it again, the quality of communication and contributions increases. Insulting someone is not as bad as politely not engaging. "Than you for participating." There is very popular and extremely PC open source project where the leadership politely avoids conflict. You try to push new ideas, corrections and features and the leaders never explains what is wrong with them or where they stand on things. People waste years before they realize that there is invincible barrier and passive-aggressive culture. ps. I think SJW's have their place when the insults become gender based and diverge from the technical aspects. Linus-type leadership can evoke copycat behaviour that is not called for.