3 ms·

I think Hurd is fixable from a functionality standpoint, but I think it is a dead end from a sociocultural standpoint. It’s old, boring, and has never worked we

I think Hurd is fixable from a functionality standpoint, but I think it is a dead end from a sociocultural standpoint. It’s old, boring, and has never worked well in its entire history, why would anybody think they could be the one that makes the difference? Nobody cares about it anymore, it’s the kernel that almost tanked the GNU ecosystem before it was saved by Linux. Out of all of the microkernels out there, the one I like the most is SEL4, but the security model is so different from most OS kernels that you essentially have to program for it from the ground up. And it seems like there isn’t any momentum there either. QNX is already very mature and performant though, and it has gotten a huge boost from IoT and electric car development, and IMO all it needs is an open source license and it will eventually creep its way into general purpose OS usage.

janneke 3y ago
GNU is not an ecosystem (see <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Ecosystem https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Ecosys...>), it's a philosophy. Yes, it's old. Yes, there's only little interest. Yes, there are _still_ many technical problems. The interesting thing here is that technical problems can be solved, and will be solved given enough time. Heck, I've heard rumors that even Windows does not crash multiple times a day anymore. Focussing and working on what is popular will most likely create a world that is less free every year. Some people rather work on something that seems right and promises a better, freer future. Even if it's not popular (right now), even if it has a high probability of failure. Popularity is a very volatile property...
- darksaints 3y ago
  The biggest success that GNU has had is that they made it incredibly unpopular to keep source code proprietary and closed. It is no longer necessary to limit yourself to just the GNU OS in order to enjoy limitless freedom of computing. And popularity might be a double edged sword, but double edged swords are still useful if you're careful.
  - janneke 3y ago
    That's a great compliment as I think the core vision of GNU is that all software should be free (<https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.en.html>). Although keeping software proprietary or writing proprietary software may have become somewhat unpopular in some niches (I'm not sure it's incredible unpopular seeing how many people and institutions still use and often advocate Apple, MicroSoft, use FaceBook, WhatsApp, whatsnot...), I'm not yet convinced that many people (say more than 1%) really believe that all software should be free and act on that?

janneke 3y ago

GNU is not an ecosystem (see <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Ecosystem https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Ecosys...>), it's a philosophy. Yes, it's old. Yes, there's only little interest. Yes, there are _still_ many technical problems. The interesting thing here is that technical problems can be solved, and will be solved given enough time. Heck, I've heard rumors that even Windows does not crash multiple times a day anymore. Focussing and working on what is popular will most likely create a world that is less free every year. Some people rather work on something that seems right and promises a better, freer future. Even if it's not popular (right now), even if it has a high probability of failure. Popularity is a very volatile property...

darksaints 3y ago
The biggest success that GNU has had is that they made it incredibly unpopular to keep source code proprietary and closed. It is no longer necessary to limit yourself to just the GNU OS in order to enjoy limitless freedom of computing. And popularity might be a double edged sword, but double edged swords are still useful if you're careful.
- janneke 3y ago
  That's a great compliment as I think the core vision of GNU is that all software should be free (<https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.en.html>). Although keeping software proprietary or writing proprietary software may have become somewhat unpopular in some niches (I'm not sure it's incredible unpopular seeing how many people and institutions still use and often advocate Apple, MicroSoft, use FaceBook, WhatsApp, whatsnot...), I'm not yet convinced that many people (say more than 1%) really believe that all software should be free and act on that?