4 ms·

OT: Open Letter to the Linux World

4 points by iio7 4y ago

skull723 4y ago
The trend you're criticising has been there for over a decade. You could save yourself a lot of anger by just using *BSD.
dane-pgp 4y ago
Just as people nowadays exclaim "Stallman was right", I suspect that in the future there will be a similar sense that "Barry was right", particularly once Linux users find themselves legally mandated to run some kind of "systemd-gatekeeperd" to check that they aren't executing any binaries whose hashes (or developer signatures) appear on a government-maintained blacklist. (I know that technically this functionality could be implemented without systemd, so a government could pass a "Gatekeeper"[0] law regardless of whether systemd existed, but the way it integrates with the boot process, especially so-called "Secure Boot", and the kernel, and controls process permissions, means that 90% of Linux users are just one unwanted software update away from complying with this law. That in turn makes it much harder to oppose such a law being introduced). [0] https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-from-mac-computers-amid-privacy-concerns https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-...
fargle 4y ago
title should say 2014. Wow! that is an absolutely EPIC rant. cannot believe I hadn't seen this until now. I'm not sure I agree with everything Barry said, but it does push a lot of buttons that ring true for me. And since 2014, systemd gained skills to control everything from home directories to secure boot, containers, privilege escalation, and (apparently) mind control, time, dns, and temporary files. It also automatically re-installs pulseaudio and reports you directly to the council of Lennart if you "accidentally" delete or turn any of it off out of frustration. I also never knew Poettering was behind (er. responsible for) avahi discovery. I must remember to properly thank him for this someday. So yes, given the benefit of six(edit) *eight years of hindsight, I think we all should've listen a bit more to Barry and perhaps slowed down and found some simplistic-er options.
- dane-pgp 4y ago
  I think you're strawmanning his argument a little bit. He didn't say that systemd has mind control powers, or reports you to some council. All he says is that systemd is "Substance D" (so it's psychoactive if ingested) and is a "medusa" (meaning it turns people to stone if they look it in the eye, although presumably he meant it's a "hydra").
  - fargle 4y ago
    oh no, true. I said all that - on top of what he said. And I didn't imply Barry said this either, it's all just what I characterize has happened 8 years hence. But I contend, after having corresponded with systemd apologists, that it truly is mindcontrold at work.
    - dane-pgp 4y ago
      Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. You are standing on the shoulders of a giant, then, and if your characterization is not yet correct, I'm sure it will be proven so within another 8 years.

4 points by iio7 4y ago

The trend you're criticising has been there for over a decade. You could save yourself a lot of anger by just using *BSD.

dane-pgp 4y ago

Just as people nowadays exclaim "Stallman was right", I suspect that in the future there will be a similar sense that "Barry was right", particularly once Linux users find themselves legally mandated to run some kind of "systemd-gatekeeperd" to check that they aren't executing any binaries whose hashes (or developer signatures) appear on a government-maintained blacklist. (I know that technically this functionality could be implemented without systemd, so a government could pass a "Gatekeeper"[0] law regardless of whether systemd existed, but the way it integrates with the boot process, especially so-called "Secure Boot", and the kernel, and controls process permissions, means that 90% of Linux users are just one unwanted software update away from complying with this law. That in turn makes it much harder to oppose such a law being introduced). [0] https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-from-mac-computers-amid-privacy-concerns https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-...

fargle 4y ago

title should say 2014. Wow! that is an absolutely EPIC rant. cannot believe I hadn't seen this until now. I'm not sure I agree with everything Barry said, but it does push a lot of buttons that ring true for me. And since 2014, systemd gained skills to control everything from home directories to secure boot, containers, privilege escalation, and (apparently) mind control, time, dns, and temporary files. It also automatically re-installs pulseaudio and reports you directly to the council of Lennart if you "accidentally" delete or turn any of it off out of frustration. I also never knew Poettering was behind (er. responsible for) avahi discovery. I must remember to properly thank him for this someday. So yes, given the benefit of six(edit) *eight years of hindsight, I think we all should've listen a bit more to Barry and perhaps slowed down and found some simplistic-er options.

dane-pgp 4y ago
I think you're strawmanning his argument a little bit. He didn't say that systemd has mind control powers, or reports you to some council. All he says is that systemd is "Substance D" (so it's psychoactive if ingested) and is a "medusa" (meaning it turns people to stone if they look it in the eye, although presumably he meant it's a "hydra").
- fargle 4y ago
  oh no, true. I said all that - on top of what he said. And I didn't imply Barry said this either, it's all just what I characterize has happened 8 years hence. But I contend, after having corresponded with systemd apologists, that it truly is mindcontrold at work.
  - dane-pgp 4y ago
    Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. You are standing on the shoulders of a giant, then, and if your characterization is not yet correct, I'm sure it will be proven so within another 8 years.