7 ms·

Linux Foundation to ban non-vaccinated people at their events

32 points by zoobab 5y ago

trefil 5y ago
Almost reads like an april fools article. Unreal.
- ipspam 5y ago
  I think it's "trollish" on purpose. They make a few good points, but do it in a mocking and humorous but borderline serious kind of way.
Miner49er 5y ago
Something the author didn't mention: this is ableist and likely illegal? They don't make an exception for medical reasons, and I would imagine that some of the medical reasons for not getting the vaccine would fall under the ADA.
- haswell 5y ago
  Something else the author did not mention is that they still have a digital experience for people who cannot attend. I’m not sure if this is sufficient to address potential ADA issues, though.
- orra 5y ago
  Almost everybody over (say) 18 is recommended to get one of the COVID vaccines, right? Pregnancy is fine. If you're allergic to the ingredients in one vaccine you can probably get another. I'm not saying nobody is inelligible, but it has to be extremely rare. Having just had COVID is the only thing I can think of.
  - Miner49er 5y ago
    I had assumed that it was like other vaccines, but I was wrong. The CDC does say most people with underyling conditions may get the vaccine. I'm not sure it is recommended or not, however. I would think that for some of these conditions a doctor may recommend against a patient getting it, at least until more data comes out. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/underlying-conditions.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend... I wouldn't be surprised if there exists a medical reason or combination of medical reasons that makes it so you shouldn't receive it though, but it is probably very rare like you say.
    - orra 5y ago
      UK advice is less ambivalent. Everybody should get vaccinated, unless allergic to a specific ingredient, or previous COVID vaccine shot. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984310/Greenbook_chapter_14a_7May2021.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... See page 21.
    - petertodd 5y ago
      So currently the only widely available covid vaccines are the mRNA ones, as Astra Zeneca and Johnson and Johnson aren't getting used in non-elderly populations due to safety issues. Both Pfizer and Moderna are two dose vaccines, and many people have had such severe reactions to the first dose that they are being told by their doctors to not take a second dose. That's not considered vaccinated by many definitions; unclear how the Linux Foundation would treat people in that situation. Similarly, there are people who have received the first dose of Astra Zeneca prior to it getting discontinued in their country. Depending on where they are they aren't necessarily eligible to receive a second dose of any covid vaccine, as mixing-and-matching isn't considered sufficiently well studied by many doctors to recommend it. Again, they're not considered vaccinated by many definitions. There's also people from countries like India and Canada who have gotten non-WHO/non-CDC approved covid vaccines. Does that count as vaccination? Again, many doctors will refuse to give them another WHO/CDC approved covid vaccine due to the unknown risks of getting multiple vaccines. This problem has already come up in Canada with foreign students, and even in the US with Astra Zeneca: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2021/06/19/broadway-changes-its-tune-on-astrazeneca-canadians-who-got-that-vaccine-can-now-attend-springsteen-show.html https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2021/06/19/broadway-chan... Finally, the WHO says that children under the age of 18 should not be vaccinated for covid at this time, a position many other countries are following. Again, they have no way to get vaccinated. The Linux Foundation may of course already ban minors for other reasons. But again, this would prevent most teens from attending their events for the foreseeable future.
- Gibbon1 5y ago
  What if you had some weird intestinal bacteria that caused you to fart cyanide gas while being immune to it? Would it be ablist and likely illegal to keep you far away from other people?
  - guilhas 5y ago
    People have been freely farting at these events, maybe it's time to put a stop to it. No risk is to little when talking about cyanide...
- tetha 5y ago
  In germany, that's an open question as far as I know. The government is a whole different can of worms, so let's stick to private companies. Companies are bound to the general law of equal treatment (AGG). This law effectively states you cannot treat a person less favorable based on a couple of protected groups - sexual identity, religion, disability, age. An initial evaluation of our parliament speculates you might be able to claim a condition rendering you unable to be vaccinated as a disability, which would render it protected under the AGG. However, it also states that in the current times, there might be a tradeoff between the fundamental rights of individuals. The right to not be harmed of every other individual on such an event might outweigh an individuals right to be treated equally. Hence, as long as this is not challenged, a german company could very much deny unvaccinated individuals entry and business, because this decision is not clear. However, it is very much within the right of everyone to sue the company and then courts will decide this tradeoff - at least as long as there is a proven medical condition.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- yongjik 5y ago
  Last year we've seen people unironically arguing that healthy young people should have rights to go wherever they wanted to, and it's the government's job to scurry away old/vulnerable people so that they don't get in the way of young people doing whatever they want, err, I mean, protecting the economy. Of course it was utterly unrealistic and there was no way it could have worked. Now that we have vaccines, and an actually viable plan to "get back to the normal" faster by asking vulnerable people to please attend whatever meeting remotely as much as possible, we get to see indignant people claiming it's "ableist" to require vaccines in a global conference. ...why am I not surprised...
  - Miner49er 5y ago
    Okay? Whether you think it's ableist or not doesn't change the fact that it's likely illegal. There's definitely good grounds for a lawsuit for violating the ADA, IMO, but IANAL. And I personally think violating the ADA is ableist, is all I meant.
CheezeIt 5y ago
Requiring vaccination from people who’ve had the disease is not just batshit crazy, it’s plain evil.
- orra 5y ago
  It's literally neither of those things.
  - CheezeIt 5y ago
    If coercing people into getting unnecessary medical procedures isn’t evil, I don’t know how to explain it to you.
    - orra 5y ago
      Complete hyperbole. Vaccination increases the duration of reinfection immunity. Moreover, significant proportions of people suffering long COVID feel an improvement after vaccination.
      - CheezeIt 5y ago
        This sort of rationalization, the notion that coercion is justifiable by arguing that it’s good for you, is the kind of evil I’m talking about.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - haswell 5y ago
      > If coercing people into getting unnecessary medical procedures… This is a pretty enormous stretch. The policy boils down to: you must be vaccinated to attend. The policy is further clarified: getting COVID does not exclude you from the vaccine requirement. As an individual interested in attending, I can either: 1. Make sure I’ve been vaccinated. 2. Attend the virtual version of the event. 3. Not attend. You have to twist this pretty hard to conclude I’m being coerced by an evil entity to get unnecessary medical procedures. And this is omitting the possible reasons a COVID positive test might not be sufficient to claim “immunity” or the safety of unprotected proximity.
haswell 5y ago
Based on this post title, I wonder if the original announcement [0] should be linked instead of this opinion about the announcement. The lunduke.com blog post omits some of the broader context and supplemental Q&A. Two that stood out to me: 1. This is currently limited to events this fall. Given the timing relative to global vaccination status, this seems like a reasonable stance. 2. They are still offering a digital version of the event. - [0] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/adoption-of-a-covid-19-vaccine-required-approach-for-our-fall-2021-event-line-up/ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/adoption-of-a-covid-19-...
modshatereality 5y ago
Did they add this to the CODE OF CONDUCT yet?
- rvz 5y ago
  Coming soon™
guilhas 5y ago
Cannot understand how the faces of software freedom are the first to forfeit actual freedom Also the vaccines are practically irrelevant unless someone is worried about being hospitalized. All governments and vaccine manufactures have been clear, vaccine does not prevent transmission Edit: People pointing out that vaccines do prevent transmission after all... In that case what is the problem with people choosing to be unvaccinated?
- Spivak 5y ago
  Liberty != Freedom If you allow unvaccinated people you force people to make the choice between their safety and a bunch of additional restrictions like reduced capacity, social distancing, mask wearing, and individuality portioned food. High freedom, low liberty. If you ban the unvaccinated then everyone can roam freely unencumbered by all those safety precautions. Low freedom, high liberty. I know which one I think is better.
  - TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
    Or you can just treat the unvaccinated like adults and let them behave as their own risk tolerance allows. That means no required masks, social distancing, or security theater like individually portioned food. High freedom, high liberty, high choice
    - Spivak 5y ago
      That doesn’t work when your actions affect more than just yourself. If my risk tolerance is high (which it is since I have a friend who has a compromised immune system and can’t risk being a carrier even though I’m vaccinated) and yours is low then we have an unresolvable problem. If you’re allowed to go around freely then my liberty is reduced because now I have to take precautions against being around you where I otherwise wouldn’t. But if you’re not then I get my liberty back as the cost of your freedom of choice. You cannot have all three. Someone is going to lose, it’s just a question of who and how much.
      - 5y ago
rockmartin 5y ago
Sad that the founder of Linux is following Bill Gates’ agenda.

32 points by zoobab 5y ago

trefil 5y ago

Almost reads like an april fools article. Unreal.

ipspam 5y ago
I think it's "trollish" on purpose. They make a few good points, but do it in a mocking and humorous but borderline serious kind of way.

Miner49er 5y ago

Something the author didn't mention: this is ableist and likely illegal? They don't make an exception for medical reasons, and I would imagine that some of the medical reasons for not getting the vaccine would fall under the ADA.

haswell 5y ago
Something else the author did not mention is that they still have a digital experience for people who cannot attend. I’m not sure if this is sufficient to address potential ADA issues, though.
orra 5y ago
Almost everybody over (say) 18 is recommended to get one of the COVID vaccines, right? Pregnancy is fine. If you're allergic to the ingredients in one vaccine you can probably get another. I'm not saying nobody is inelligible, but it has to be extremely rare. Having just had COVID is the only thing I can think of.
- Miner49er 5y ago
  I had assumed that it was like other vaccines, but I was wrong. The CDC does say most people with underyling conditions may get the vaccine. I'm not sure it is recommended or not, however. I would think that for some of these conditions a doctor may recommend against a patient getting it, at least until more data comes out. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/underlying-conditions.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend... I wouldn't be surprised if there exists a medical reason or combination of medical reasons that makes it so you shouldn't receive it though, but it is probably very rare like you say.
  - orra 5y ago
    UK advice is less ambivalent. Everybody should get vaccinated, unless allergic to a specific ingredient, or previous COVID vaccine shot. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984310/Greenbook_chapter_14a_7May2021.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... See page 21.
  - petertodd 5y ago
    So currently the only widely available covid vaccines are the mRNA ones, as Astra Zeneca and Johnson and Johnson aren't getting used in non-elderly populations due to safety issues. Both Pfizer and Moderna are two dose vaccines, and many people have had such severe reactions to the first dose that they are being told by their doctors to not take a second dose. That's not considered vaccinated by many definitions; unclear how the Linux Foundation would treat people in that situation. Similarly, there are people who have received the first dose of Astra Zeneca prior to it getting discontinued in their country. Depending on where they are they aren't necessarily eligible to receive a second dose of any covid vaccine, as mixing-and-matching isn't considered sufficiently well studied by many doctors to recommend it. Again, they're not considered vaccinated by many definitions. There's also people from countries like India and Canada who have gotten non-WHO/non-CDC approved covid vaccines. Does that count as vaccination? Again, many doctors will refuse to give them another WHO/CDC approved covid vaccine due to the unknown risks of getting multiple vaccines. This problem has already come up in Canada with foreign students, and even in the US with Astra Zeneca: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2021/06/19/broadway-changes-its-tune-on-astrazeneca-canadians-who-got-that-vaccine-can-now-attend-springsteen-show.html https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2021/06/19/broadway-chan... Finally, the WHO says that children under the age of 18 should not be vaccinated for covid at this time, a position many other countries are following. Again, they have no way to get vaccinated. The Linux Foundation may of course already ban minors for other reasons. But again, this would prevent most teens from attending their events for the foreseeable future.
Gibbon1 5y ago
What if you had some weird intestinal bacteria that caused you to fart cyanide gas while being immune to it? Would it be ablist and likely illegal to keep you far away from other people?
- guilhas 5y ago
  People have been freely farting at these events, maybe it's time to put a stop to it. No risk is to little when talking about cyanide...
tetha 5y ago
In germany, that's an open question as far as I know. The government is a whole different can of worms, so let's stick to private companies. Companies are bound to the general law of equal treatment (AGG). This law effectively states you cannot treat a person less favorable based on a couple of protected groups - sexual identity, religion, disability, age. An initial evaluation of our parliament speculates you might be able to claim a condition rendering you unable to be vaccinated as a disability, which would render it protected under the AGG. However, it also states that in the current times, there might be a tradeoff between the fundamental rights of individuals. The right to not be harmed of every other individual on such an event might outweigh an individuals right to be treated equally. Hence, as long as this is not challenged, a german company could very much deny unvaccinated individuals entry and business, because this decision is not clear. However, it is very much within the right of everyone to sue the company and then courts will decide this tradeoff - at least as long as there is a proven medical condition.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
yongjik 5y ago
Last year we've seen people unironically arguing that healthy young people should have rights to go wherever they wanted to, and it's the government's job to scurry away old/vulnerable people so that they don't get in the way of young people doing whatever they want, err, I mean, protecting the economy. Of course it was utterly unrealistic and there was no way it could have worked. Now that we have vaccines, and an actually viable plan to "get back to the normal" faster by asking vulnerable people to please attend whatever meeting remotely as much as possible, we get to see indignant people claiming it's "ableist" to require vaccines in a global conference. ...why am I not surprised...
- Miner49er 5y ago
  Okay? Whether you think it's ableist or not doesn't change the fact that it's likely illegal. There's definitely good grounds for a lawsuit for violating the ADA, IMO, but IANAL. And I personally think violating the ADA is ableist, is all I meant.

CheezeIt 5y ago

Requiring vaccination from people who’ve had the disease is not just batshit crazy, it’s plain evil.

orra 5y ago
It's literally neither of those things.
- CheezeIt 5y ago
  If coercing people into getting unnecessary medical procedures isn’t evil, I don’t know how to explain it to you.
  - orra 5y ago
    Complete hyperbole. Vaccination increases the duration of reinfection immunity. Moreover, significant proportions of people suffering long COVID feel an improvement after vaccination.
    - CheezeIt 5y ago
      This sort of rationalization, the notion that coercion is justifiable by arguing that it’s good for you, is the kind of evil I’m talking about.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - haswell 5y ago
    > If coercing people into getting unnecessary medical procedures… This is a pretty enormous stretch. The policy boils down to: you must be vaccinated to attend. The policy is further clarified: getting COVID does not exclude you from the vaccine requirement. As an individual interested in attending, I can either: 1. Make sure I’ve been vaccinated. 2. Attend the virtual version of the event. 3. Not attend. You have to twist this pretty hard to conclude I’m being coerced by an evil entity to get unnecessary medical procedures. And this is omitting the possible reasons a COVID positive test might not be sufficient to claim “immunity” or the safety of unprotected proximity.

haswell 5y ago

Based on this post title, I wonder if the original announcement [0] should be linked instead of this opinion about the announcement. The lunduke.com blog post omits some of the broader context and supplemental Q&A. Two that stood out to me: 1. This is currently limited to events this fall. Given the timing relative to global vaccination status, this seems like a reasonable stance. 2. They are still offering a digital version of the event. - [0] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/adoption-of-a-covid-19-vaccine-required-approach-for-our-fall-2021-event-line-up/ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/adoption-of-a-covid-19-...

modshatereality 5y ago

Did they add this to the CODE OF CONDUCT yet?

rvz 5y ago
Coming soon™

guilhas 5y ago

Cannot understand how the faces of software freedom are the first to forfeit actual freedom Also the vaccines are practically irrelevant unless someone is worried about being hospitalized. All governments and vaccine manufactures have been clear, vaccine does not prevent transmission Edit: People pointing out that vaccines do prevent transmission after all... In that case what is the problem with people choosing to be unvaccinated?

Spivak 5y ago
Liberty != Freedom If you allow unvaccinated people you force people to make the choice between their safety and a bunch of additional restrictions like reduced capacity, social distancing, mask wearing, and individuality portioned food. High freedom, low liberty. If you ban the unvaccinated then everyone can roam freely unencumbered by all those safety precautions. Low freedom, high liberty. I know which one I think is better.
- TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
  Or you can just treat the unvaccinated like adults and let them behave as their own risk tolerance allows. That means no required masks, social distancing, or security theater like individually portioned food. High freedom, high liberty, high choice
  - Spivak 5y ago
    That doesn’t work when your actions affect more than just yourself. If my risk tolerance is high (which it is since I have a friend who has a compromised immune system and can’t risk being a carrier even though I’m vaccinated) and yours is low then we have an unresolvable problem. If you’re allowed to go around freely then my liberty is reduced because now I have to take precautions against being around you where I otherwise wouldn’t. But if you’re not then I get my liberty back as the cost of your freedom of choice. You cannot have all three. Someone is going to lose, it’s just a question of who and how much.
    - 5y ago

rockmartin 5y ago

Sad that the founder of Linux is following Bill Gates’ agenda.