6 ms·

On software communities, "Rock star" programmers, and... Linus

59 points by samuellevy 14y ago

bendauphinee 14y ago
I agree with these points. It's completely fair for them to have a strong opinion, and express that opinion. I've not felt that any of the stuff I've read from Linus has ever been disrespectful, and they are all well formed and written to top it off. Just because they are not the welcome wagon, does not make them terrible people.
losethos 14y ago
The india nigger doctor wrote this -- I can tell by the simple bad sentences.
tytso 14y ago
One of the reasons why it happens is because it's all too easy for someone to "make their bones" by criticizing someone famous. If you're a blogger, and you're trying to get attention (or trying to get karma points on Hacker News :-), what better way than to slam someone like Linus Torvalds by saying, "Shame, shame! You should suffer fools, and it's bad form to call people who are idiots for what they are."
tsurantino 14y ago
I just think the arguments fall on two spectrums. On one end is that Linus is God and that he's untouchable. On the other end is that Linus is a asshole that tells everyone off. The more reasonable middle being that Linus is a pretty smart guy with an incredibly history of accomplishment. He's should be respected and his way of conversing with people is particular to personality. Like, we deal with people with personalities all the time. I don't think Linus has ever, despite all his cursing, personally attacked anyone. He just attacks stupid ideas. I find his comments refreshing. You just need to give him some trust to understand why he is saying whatever he is saying. I don't think that also implies that people should be unwelcoming or that people should have new ideas/opinions on what should be what. I think that Linus isn't some selfish jerk who doesn't want people to get involved with Linux. I think he just has reasonable expectations and isn't afraid to call you on your shit. Cool post though.
- insulanus 14y ago
  Well, his accomplishments and technical judgement should be respected. You don't have to respect a person's character to respect their accomplishments.
x1 14y ago
This has nothing to do with Linus... feel free to ignore. A few years ago, oh hell looks like more than a decade ago, I was working with a brand new project manager. This guy was pretty fresh, saw the world "manager" and got all glossy eye'd. He walked around the office "cracking the whip" and liked to make statements such as "I'm not here to make friends" and "I'm here to get these projects done". Do you think, if this was ProjectManagerNews instead of HackerNews this person would be idolized? Would be held in high regard? Would other ProjectManagers stick up for him? What if he led a successful project or two? Would that validate his decision to act that way? ...more importantly: Would you want to work for him? Is success a solid defense on being an asshole? I'm perfectly happy to sit down and discuss a problem but I've got not time for assholes, tempers, or rockstars for that matter.
- pavanky 14y ago
  What if the manager was managing 2000 people instead of 20 ? Would you want him to sit down and discuss the problems with each and every one of them ? In traditional companies there are heirarchies and such to avoid a single person being in charge of so many underlings. In open source arena, there are parctically no hierarchies and the communication can be initiated by anyone contributing to the project. Sometimes it gets repetitive, sometimes it is not relavent. Sometimes you have to be an asshole to make the other person to do a bit of self censoring.
  - nakkiel 14y ago
    In this case, what you really mean is that the Open Source model is broken. Perhaps he should spend time fixing it instead of bashing innocents? I don't think the Open Source model is broken. I actually don't think the Open Source model is any different from a "traditional company". Reputation is used were titles were but in the end, when someone with either says something, people just follow or disagree and leave. Linus is clearly having a case of XKCD #386 (aka. Someone is wrong on the Internet). There's no excuse for being bored of repeating the same thing and loosing temper. It's still loosing temper. He could as well stay silent after expressing his opinion once. It actually sounds pretty stupid to imagine Linus replying to each email disagreeing to express his opinion. Some people are talking about the fact that he is opinionated. I don't think so. Theo de Raadt is opinionated. Linus is referred to as "the leader with no personality" in several BSD circles and I can't help but seeing each of his "famous emails" as an attempt at building
zalew 14y ago
My favorite example on topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o Arguing rethorics is a fallacy - if you can't prove someone wrong, you raise political correctness issues.
polemic 14y ago
> "One of the arguments which gets dragged out every time is that they are role models, and as such should be doing their very best to create a welcoming environment for everyone... Bullshit" +1 So called "rock star" developers, particularly the really prolific ones, are busy getting s#!t done. Linux has no shortage off helpful community members who are not otherwise primarily charged with governance of (possibly) the most important open source software ever made.
ZenPsycho 14y ago
It's pretty easy to not be called an idiot by people like Linus: Don't be an idiot. It's strange that so many people can't manage to do that, and take offense when someone points it out.
- primatology 14y ago
  I firmly believe we shouldn't ridicule people for mistakes. You don't have to feel like shit to recognize and learn. People who occasionally behave idiotically are not idiots. People who repeatedly behave idiotically are the true idiots.
  - ZenPsycho 14y ago
    This is true, but if you actually look into these "incidents" that linus and rms et. al have been involved in, instead of just reading the trashy tabloid blogs /about/ them, you'll find that they are not in fact, stepping outside of that basic principle.
  - gcr 14y ago
    I belive we should criticise ideas, not people. It's one thing to have an idiotic idea. Having an idiotic idea is OK. Saying that someone's idea is idiotic is OK. It's quite another thing to be an idiot. Calling someone an idiot is not OK.
    - primatology 14y ago
      I absolutely agree in theory. But I've found certain individuals tend to have a disproportionately high number of idiotic ideas. My frustration builds quickly with said individuals, and I'm only human. I insist, however, upon giving everyone the benefit of the doubt for the first few idiotic ideas, because I expect the same in return. I'm not immune to bouts of idiocy myself.
a3d6g2f7 14y ago
I find it best to just stick to reading people's code and their documentation (if any) as opposed to reading what comments they make about computers, software, or any other subject. This is because the more I learn about them as people the more likely I am to be disappointed. They will say something stupid. Or, e.g., I find out they like some OS, application or language that I just cannot stand. And I'm like WTF? In short, they are just very different people. I may never meet them in person. It's probably better that I don't. The code I am using as a model might have actually been written a dog, posing as a person, like the one in the NewYorker cartoon. Who knows? Trying to view these authors as "models" (versus seeing only their _code_ as a model) is just setting yourself up for disappoinment. That said, some of my all time favorite "coder prose" is the netcat source. Let's face it, programming can be very frustrating. And you need a sense of humor. I wish he was still actively writing and releasing software. And that program still compiles as smooth as any, 15 years later. Great stuff.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago
This is a false dichotomy. It is possible to have an opinion and not be an asshole. It just takes more work to do so. The real argument should be "I'm glad <insert name here> is a jerk because it allows him to spend more time doing <insert cool thing here>." Personally, I think the extra work is worth it, but I'm also not the hub of a project like Linux, a movement like the FSF, or a company like Apple. Above and beyond everything else, the most interesting question is: Can you get into the hub position without being a prick?
- primatology 14y ago
  > I'm glad <insert name here> is a jerk because it allows him to spend more time doing <insert cool thing here>. I'm convinced that's a fallacy. Is "[Github's] pull requests and the online commit editing, are just pure garbage, go file a bug report with them" that much easier to voice than "[Github's] pull requests don't provide the flexibility or formatting we need for the kernel, so please read up on the proper pull request procedure. thanks!"? Plus such courtesy eliminates the inevitable outrage of the anti-prick crusade.
  - ZenPsycho 14y ago
    Yes, because nobody can calculate in advance the thousands of ways any particular utterance might be interpreted by someone. It's rather neurotic to try, and much easier to just say what you mean, and accept that haters gonna hate.
    - xaa 14y ago
      I don't see that calling people "morons" or their work "garbage" as being that ambiguous.
      - ZenPsycho 14y ago
        exactly
      - 1SaltwaterC 14y ago
scythe 14y ago
Why is it that nobody notices the selection bias? Linus sends hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails every week. Does it really surprise anyone that we've been able to find fully four instances in the past six months in which he sounded somewhat angry? Is there anyone here who can claim a pristine post history? This certainly applies to RMS as well.
- insulanus 14y ago
  You have a very valid point. Recently, it seemed that Linus couldn't go 5 minutes without calling someone a moron. So, I went to his G+ feed and read a few entries. It seems he does NOT call someone a moron in every post! edit: He must get quite frustrated sometimes.
  - ninjin 14y ago
    It seems to be that there are pretty much "roles" that we expect public persona to fill. RMS is supposed to be a freedom nut, Linus is supposed to be a rude ranting geek, Palin is supposed to be a complete nut that never gets anything right and so on. Somehow it seems that in the flow of news and information we turn all the individuals into characters from a sitcom. Not allowing information through when they are acting "out of character" or even appearing to be quite human.
  - vacri 14y ago
    I've seen posts here on HN lambasting Torvalds for being abusive, but on further examination, it was around comment #130 in a thread where he'd patiently and politely explained his point of view four times already in that thread, and was still hitting a brick wall with someone wilfully ignoring his points. Of course, this prelude wasn't indicated in the 'linus is an arsehole' tone of the story, it was linked directly and out of context.
    - samuellevy 14y ago
      And that's frequently how it is. There's a fascination that people seem to have with _proving_ that Linus (or RMS, or Jeff Atwood, or others) are jerks. In almost every instance I've seen, it really is a case that someone has been pestering them, or out to pick a fight, and by the time the argument happens, all the back-story is forgotten (or, in the git-hub pull-request case, deleted by the original author). The end result is that we have these tabloid-esque articles showing up on blogs telling us that we should be shocked and outraged at the actions of these people because they're "role models" and "shouldn't act like that". It's insane; it truly is.
jamesflorentino 14y ago
I can't imagine managing an open-source project as big as Linux. Therefore, I cannot judge Linus' way of voicing out his mind. But if there is one advantage I see from the way he does it is that it drives careless and willfully ignorant people away from his project. In my personal opinion, I think people are quickly judging Linus' personality based on some texts they see on their computer screen alone.
insulanus 14y ago
What frustrates me is you young bucks confusing Linus' personality with his technical prowess. He is not (only) his code. What if you found out Mozart ate little babies. Some of you would say that his music sucks. Some of you would say "Well, Mozart had to eat babies, to fuel his creative genius!" Few would accept that Mozart was a flipping musical genius who ate babies. From what I've read online, Linus can be a churlish little bitch, obviously ignoring the issue at hand when it suits him. Sometimes, he calls someone a moron, because they have done something he doesn't like, for some social reason. But he's a damn fine programmer, and can logic it up with the best of 'em. Often, when you get the the moron blessing from Linus, you have made a grave technical error, and you should be called on it. I wouldn't use the same style as Linus, but ey, to each his own. Just enjoy him for what he is, and leave the cult of personality stuff for others.
- bmelton 14y ago
  Thank you. I don't know where the 'young bucks' demarcation point is, but I, at 34, can remember when I was either willing to forgive my idols for their transgressions or wasn't. And I also remember that feeling you pointed out of either rationalizing it or being unable to, and it mostly having to do with how I felt about them before I found out about whatever thing they did that crossed me. I don't remember when it happened exactly, but I've since grown to the point that I can separate someone's good qualities from their bad. I hate Ben Roethlisberger for his off-field behavior (and because I'm honor bound by being a Ravens fan,) but I won't let that delude me from thinking he isn't a quarterback that most teams would kill to have. Maybe it's just seeing more and more of your idols fall away as it's hard to find anybody who honestly doesn't do something that irritates you in some way, and in just the way your closest friends do. Everybody put on a pedestal will eventually fall off, or failing that, die. Anyway, I'm rambling at the moment, but your post touched a chord, and hopefully people can appreciate the truth in it before rushing to rationalize it.
coffeemug 14y ago
It isn't a matter of having strong, dissenting, controversial, or unpopular opinions. It's a matter of not having tact.
georgieporgie 14y ago
Bullshit right back. I don't pay attention to the others, but Torvalds is awful. His bizarro personal attack on C++ programmers when explaining why C++ isn't used in the kernel was wildly unnecessary. There are sufficient technical reasons alone. I watched his talk on git where he repeatedly said SVN sucked in order to make the case for git, but he never gave any example of why SVN sucks. In other words, the only people to benefit from his comments were git users who already shared his hate for SVN. I like Linux. I cannot stand Linus, and I'll avoid him at every chance. He relishes in being awful to people and, regardless of his technical contribution, he seems like a terrible person.
- rohit89 14y ago
  I believe he gave very good reasons on why you should use git other than "svn sucks".
  - georgieporgie 14y ago
    Sure. But he didn't give any explanation for why SVN sucks. He merely repeated the mantra at every opportunity. Well, if you don't have problems with SVN, then he hasn't done much of a job explaining how git is an improvement, has he? Why even bring up the competition if you're just going to vaguely say "X sucks and we all know it!" without ever drawing a comparison or explaining why the competition is weak in an area?
    - klez 14y ago
      I didn't see the talk, but comparing git to SVN is like comparing vim to eclipse. They are two tools to do different (even if similar in some ways) task. So I don't need reasons of why SVN sucks if I have no problem with SVN and I'm not doing distributed develompent. Just my 2 cents
haberman 14y ago
This is a low-quality essay that is not worth discussing directly. (Meta-note: see, it's possible to have firm opinions without being abusive). I just want to add that there are plenty of outstanding engineers with very high standards who lead projects without going on the kinds of abusive rants that Linus is known for. For example: Roberto Ierusalimschy (Lua), Matz (Ruby), Ian Lance Taylor (Binutils, GCC, Gold linker), Shawn Hargreaves (Allegro, works at Microsoft now), Jeff Dean & Sanjay Ghemawat (two of Google's most senior engineers), just to name a few. These guys don't compromise their opinions or let crap into the code-base just to be nice. But they're all really nice guys who don't rip into people for being wrong. When you see messages from them on a mailing list, you get a warm feeling because you know they are going to be insightful, accurate, terse, helpful, and friendly. Some people like the machismo that comes from people like Linus. It's like watching superhero movies and rooting for the guy who kicks ass against the bad guys. But I think ultimately this is not a healthy way to lead a community. If you speak in a way that triggers people's defense mechanisms, you make it harder to rationally evaluate the issues. If you ridicule people for their opinions, you aren't giving them an out that lets them change their mind later; a person is inclined to dig their heels in rather than look foolish.
- samuellevy 14y ago
  As another commenter mentioned - it's somewhat of a selection bias; Linus doesn't go around spouting hate-speech, but when he has jack of someone pestering him with an idea/patch/whatever that he has (many times, repeatedly) turned down, then he'll stop being polite about it. Could he ignore it? Perhaps. I prefer that he'll let you know, in no uncertain terms, to go away. These rants aren't actually that frequent, but you'd think that they were constant from the way you hear about them. It's not really about having firm opinions without being abusive. It's about being called abusive for having firm opinions.
- vacri 14y ago
  "This is a low-quality essay that is not worth discussing directly" and "This is a stupid essay not worth my time" are saying the same thing, and providing the same level of abuse; one is just using more highbrow language in an attempt to feign politeness. Avoiding coarse language does not mean you're not being snide or offensive, and people hiding snide commentary in nice prose is one of my pet hates.
comex 14y ago
The popularity of those controversial comments seems to generate a lot of insightful discussion; whatever the merits of the original comments, I enjoy reading debates on Hacker News about C++ or GitHub pull requests.
uuilly 14y ago
A non-trivial percentage of "rock star" software engineers are not capable of behaving themselves. The causes are varied. Some have been so busy getting A's and working upwards that they never formed lateral bonds with their peers. Some have something clinically wrong them. Some have been told they're right so much that they don't know how to behave when they're wrong. Some tie so much of their self worth to the problem they're solving that disagreement becomes a personal insult. Whatever the reason, the software industry repeatedly explains away debilitating personality flaws as a cute quirk or even a benefit. It reminds me of D1 football coaches defending players who behave like animals off the field. There is almost never an acceptable reason for being an asshole. It may be worth it to hire an asshole but that does not absolve that person of being an asshole. It just makes them a smart asshole.

59 points by samuellevy 14y ago

I agree with these points. It's completely fair for them to have a strong opinion, and express that opinion. I've not felt that any of the stuff I've read from Linus has ever been disrespectful, and they are all well formed and written to top it off. Just because they are not the welcome wagon, does not make them terrible people.

losethos 14y ago

The india nigger doctor wrote this -- I can tell by the simple bad sentences.

tytso 14y ago

One of the reasons why it happens is because it's all too easy for someone to "make their bones" by criticizing someone famous. If you're a blogger, and you're trying to get attention (or trying to get karma points on Hacker News :-), what better way than to slam someone like Linus Torvalds by saying, "Shame, shame! You should suffer fools, and it's bad form to call people who are idiots for what they are."

tsurantino 14y ago

I just think the arguments fall on two spectrums. On one end is that Linus is God and that he's untouchable. On the other end is that Linus is a asshole that tells everyone off. The more reasonable middle being that Linus is a pretty smart guy with an incredibly history of accomplishment. He's should be respected and his way of conversing with people is particular to personality. Like, we deal with people with personalities all the time. I don't think Linus has ever, despite all his cursing, personally attacked anyone. He just attacks stupid ideas. I find his comments refreshing. You just need to give him some trust to understand why he is saying whatever he is saying. I don't think that also implies that people should be unwelcoming or that people should have new ideas/opinions on what should be what. I think that Linus isn't some selfish jerk who doesn't want people to get involved with Linux. I think he just has reasonable expectations and isn't afraid to call you on your shit. Cool post though.

insulanus 14y ago
Well, his accomplishments and technical judgement should be respected. You don't have to respect a person's character to respect their accomplishments.

x1 14y ago

This has nothing to do with Linus... feel free to ignore. A few years ago, oh hell looks like more than a decade ago, I was working with a brand new project manager. This guy was pretty fresh, saw the world "manager" and got all glossy eye'd. He walked around the office "cracking the whip" and liked to make statements such as "I'm not here to make friends" and "I'm here to get these projects done". Do you think, if this was ProjectManagerNews instead of HackerNews this person would be idolized? Would be held in high regard? Would other ProjectManagers stick up for him? What if he led a successful project or two? Would that validate his decision to act that way? ...more importantly: Would you want to work for him? Is success a solid defense on being an asshole? I'm perfectly happy to sit down and discuss a problem but I've got not time for assholes, tempers, or rockstars for that matter.

pavanky 14y ago
What if the manager was managing 2000 people instead of 20 ? Would you want him to sit down and discuss the problems with each and every one of them ? In traditional companies there are heirarchies and such to avoid a single person being in charge of so many underlings. In open source arena, there are parctically no hierarchies and the communication can be initiated by anyone contributing to the project. Sometimes it gets repetitive, sometimes it is not relavent. Sometimes you have to be an asshole to make the other person to do a bit of self censoring.
- nakkiel 14y ago
  In this case, what you really mean is that the Open Source model is broken. Perhaps he should spend time fixing it instead of bashing innocents? I don't think the Open Source model is broken. I actually don't think the Open Source model is any different from a "traditional company". Reputation is used were titles were but in the end, when someone with either says something, people just follow or disagree and leave. Linus is clearly having a case of XKCD #386 (aka. Someone is wrong on the Internet). There's no excuse for being bored of repeating the same thing and loosing temper. It's still loosing temper. He could as well stay silent after expressing his opinion once. It actually sounds pretty stupid to imagine Linus replying to each email disagreeing to express his opinion. Some people are talking about the fact that he is opinionated. I don't think so. Theo de Raadt is opinionated. Linus is referred to as "the leader with no personality" in several BSD circles and I can't help but seeing each of his "famous emails" as an attempt at building

zalew 14y ago

My favorite example on topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o Arguing rethorics is a fallacy - if you can't prove someone wrong, you raise political correctness issues.

polemic 14y ago

> "One of the arguments which gets dragged out every time is that they are role models, and as such should be doing their very best to create a welcoming environment for everyone... Bullshit" +1 So called "rock star" developers, particularly the really prolific ones, are busy getting s#!t done. Linux has no shortage off helpful community members who are not otherwise primarily charged with governance of (possibly) the most important open source software ever made.

ZenPsycho 14y ago

It's pretty easy to not be called an idiot by people like Linus: Don't be an idiot. It's strange that so many people can't manage to do that, and take offense when someone points it out.

primatology 14y ago
I firmly believe we shouldn't ridicule people for mistakes. You don't have to feel like shit to recognize and learn. People who occasionally behave idiotically are not idiots. People who repeatedly behave idiotically are the true idiots.
- ZenPsycho 14y ago
  This is true, but if you actually look into these "incidents" that linus and rms et. al have been involved in, instead of just reading the trashy tabloid blogs /about/ them, you'll find that they are not in fact, stepping outside of that basic principle.
- gcr 14y ago
  I belive we should criticise ideas, not people. It's one thing to have an idiotic idea. Having an idiotic idea is OK. Saying that someone's idea is idiotic is OK. It's quite another thing to be an idiot. Calling someone an idiot is not OK.
  - primatology 14y ago
    I absolutely agree in theory. But I've found certain individuals tend to have a disproportionately high number of idiotic ideas. My frustration builds quickly with said individuals, and I'm only human. I insist, however, upon giving everyone the benefit of the doubt for the first few idiotic ideas, because I expect the same in return. I'm not immune to bouts of idiocy myself.

a3d6g2f7 14y ago

I find it best to just stick to reading people's code and their documentation (if any) as opposed to reading what comments they make about computers, software, or any other subject. This is because the more I learn about them as people the more likely I am to be disappointed. They will say something stupid. Or, e.g., I find out they like some OS, application or language that I just cannot stand. And I'm like WTF? In short, they are just very different people. I may never meet them in person. It's probably better that I don't. The code I am using as a model might have actually been written a dog, posing as a person, like the one in the NewYorker cartoon. Who knows? Trying to view these authors as "models" (versus seeing only their _code_ as a model) is just setting yourself up for disappoinment. That said, some of my all time favorite "coder prose" is the netcat source. Let's face it, programming can be very frustrating. And you need a sense of humor. I wish he was still actively writing and releasing software. And that program still compiles as smooth as any, 15 years later. Great stuff.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago

This is a false dichotomy. It is possible to have an opinion and not be an asshole. It just takes more work to do so. The real argument should be "I'm glad <insert name here> is a jerk because it allows him to spend more time doing <insert cool thing here>." Personally, I think the extra work is worth it, but I'm also not the hub of a project like Linux, a movement like the FSF, or a company like Apple. Above and beyond everything else, the most interesting question is: Can you get into the hub position without being a prick?

primatology 14y ago
> I'm glad <insert name here> is a jerk because it allows him to spend more time doing <insert cool thing here>. I'm convinced that's a fallacy. Is "[Github's] pull requests and the online commit editing, are just pure garbage, go file a bug report with them" that much easier to voice than "[Github's] pull requests don't provide the flexibility or formatting we need for the kernel, so please read up on the proper pull request procedure. thanks!"? Plus such courtesy eliminates the inevitable outrage of the anti-prick crusade.
- ZenPsycho 14y ago
  Yes, because nobody can calculate in advance the thousands of ways any particular utterance might be interpreted by someone. It's rather neurotic to try, and much easier to just say what you mean, and accept that haters gonna hate.
  - xaa 14y ago
    I don't see that calling people "morons" or their work "garbage" as being that ambiguous.
    - ZenPsycho 14y ago
      exactly
    - 1SaltwaterC 14y ago

scythe 14y ago

Why is it that nobody notices the selection bias? Linus sends hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails every week. Does it really surprise anyone that we've been able to find fully four instances in the past six months in which he sounded somewhat angry? Is there anyone here who can claim a pristine post history? This certainly applies to RMS as well.

insulanus 14y ago
You have a very valid point. Recently, it seemed that Linus couldn't go 5 minutes without calling someone a moron. So, I went to his G+ feed and read a few entries. It seems he does NOT call someone a moron in every post! edit: He must get quite frustrated sometimes.
- ninjin 14y ago
  It seems to be that there are pretty much "roles" that we expect public persona to fill. RMS is supposed to be a freedom nut, Linus is supposed to be a rude ranting geek, Palin is supposed to be a complete nut that never gets anything right and so on. Somehow it seems that in the flow of news and information we turn all the individuals into characters from a sitcom. Not allowing information through when they are acting "out of character" or even appearing to be quite human.
- vacri 14y ago
  I've seen posts here on HN lambasting Torvalds for being abusive, but on further examination, it was around comment #130 in a thread where he'd patiently and politely explained his point of view four times already in that thread, and was still hitting a brick wall with someone wilfully ignoring his points. Of course, this prelude wasn't indicated in the 'linus is an arsehole' tone of the story, it was linked directly and out of context.
  - samuellevy 14y ago
    And that's frequently how it is. There's a fascination that people seem to have with _proving_ that Linus (or RMS, or Jeff Atwood, or others) are jerks. In almost every instance I've seen, it really is a case that someone has been pestering them, or out to pick a fight, and by the time the argument happens, all the back-story is forgotten (or, in the git-hub pull-request case, deleted by the original author). The end result is that we have these tabloid-esque articles showing up on blogs telling us that we should be shocked and outraged at the actions of these people because they're "role models" and "shouldn't act like that". It's insane; it truly is.

jamesflorentino 14y ago

I can't imagine managing an open-source project as big as Linux. Therefore, I cannot judge Linus' way of voicing out his mind. But if there is one advantage I see from the way he does it is that it drives careless and willfully ignorant people away from his project. In my personal opinion, I think people are quickly judging Linus' personality based on some texts they see on their computer screen alone.

insulanus 14y ago

What frustrates me is you young bucks confusing Linus' personality with his technical prowess. He is not (only) his code. What if you found out Mozart ate little babies. Some of you would say that his music sucks. Some of you would say "Well, Mozart had to eat babies, to fuel his creative genius!" Few would accept that Mozart was a flipping musical genius who ate babies. From what I've read online, Linus can be a churlish little bitch, obviously ignoring the issue at hand when it suits him. Sometimes, he calls someone a moron, because they have done something he doesn't like, for some social reason. But he's a damn fine programmer, and can logic it up with the best of 'em. Often, when you get the the moron blessing from Linus, you have made a grave technical error, and you should be called on it. I wouldn't use the same style as Linus, but ey, to each his own. Just enjoy him for what he is, and leave the cult of personality stuff for others.

bmelton 14y ago
Thank you. I don't know where the 'young bucks' demarcation point is, but I, at 34, can remember when I was either willing to forgive my idols for their transgressions or wasn't. And I also remember that feeling you pointed out of either rationalizing it or being unable to, and it mostly having to do with how I felt about them before I found out about whatever thing they did that crossed me. I don't remember when it happened exactly, but I've since grown to the point that I can separate someone's good qualities from their bad. I hate Ben Roethlisberger for his off-field behavior (and because I'm honor bound by being a Ravens fan,) but I won't let that delude me from thinking he isn't a quarterback that most teams would kill to have. Maybe it's just seeing more and more of your idols fall away as it's hard to find anybody who honestly doesn't do something that irritates you in some way, and in just the way your closest friends do. Everybody put on a pedestal will eventually fall off, or failing that, die. Anyway, I'm rambling at the moment, but your post touched a chord, and hopefully people can appreciate the truth in it before rushing to rationalize it.

coffeemug 14y ago

It isn't a matter of having strong, dissenting, controversial, or unpopular opinions. It's a matter of not having tact.

georgieporgie 14y ago

Bullshit right back. I don't pay attention to the others, but Torvalds is awful. His bizarro personal attack on C++ programmers when explaining why C++ isn't used in the kernel was wildly unnecessary. There are sufficient technical reasons alone. I watched his talk on git where he repeatedly said SVN sucked in order to make the case for git, but he never gave any example of why SVN sucks. In other words, the only people to benefit from his comments were git users who already shared his hate for SVN. I like Linux. I cannot stand Linus, and I'll avoid him at every chance. He relishes in being awful to people and, regardless of his technical contribution, he seems like a terrible person.

rohit89 14y ago
I believe he gave very good reasons on why you should use git other than "svn sucks".
- georgieporgie 14y ago
  Sure. But he didn't give any explanation for why SVN sucks. He merely repeated the mantra at every opportunity. Well, if you don't have problems with SVN, then he hasn't done much of a job explaining how git is an improvement, has he? Why even bring up the competition if you're just going to vaguely say "X sucks and we all know it!" without ever drawing a comparison or explaining why the competition is weak in an area?
  - klez 14y ago
    I didn't see the talk, but comparing git to SVN is like comparing vim to eclipse. They are two tools to do different (even if similar in some ways) task. So I don't need reasons of why SVN sucks if I have no problem with SVN and I'm not doing distributed develompent. Just my 2 cents

haberman 14y ago

This is a low-quality essay that is not worth discussing directly. (Meta-note: see, it's possible to have firm opinions without being abusive). I just want to add that there are plenty of outstanding engineers with very high standards who lead projects without going on the kinds of abusive rants that Linus is known for. For example: Roberto Ierusalimschy (Lua), Matz (Ruby), Ian Lance Taylor (Binutils, GCC, Gold linker), Shawn Hargreaves (Allegro, works at Microsoft now), Jeff Dean & Sanjay Ghemawat (two of Google's most senior engineers), just to name a few. These guys don't compromise their opinions or let crap into the code-base just to be nice. But they're all really nice guys who don't rip into people for being wrong. When you see messages from them on a mailing list, you get a warm feeling because you know they are going to be insightful, accurate, terse, helpful, and friendly. Some people like the machismo that comes from people like Linus. It's like watching superhero movies and rooting for the guy who kicks ass against the bad guys. But I think ultimately this is not a healthy way to lead a community. If you speak in a way that triggers people's defense mechanisms, you make it harder to rationally evaluate the issues. If you ridicule people for their opinions, you aren't giving them an out that lets them change their mind later; a person is inclined to dig their heels in rather than look foolish.

samuellevy 14y ago
As another commenter mentioned - it's somewhat of a selection bias; Linus doesn't go around spouting hate-speech, but when he has jack of someone pestering him with an idea/patch/whatever that he has (many times, repeatedly) turned down, then he'll stop being polite about it. Could he ignore it? Perhaps. I prefer that he'll let you know, in no uncertain terms, to go away. These rants aren't actually that frequent, but you'd think that they were constant from the way you hear about them. It's not really about having firm opinions without being abusive. It's about being called abusive for having firm opinions.
vacri 14y ago
"This is a low-quality essay that is not worth discussing directly" and "This is a stupid essay not worth my time" are saying the same thing, and providing the same level of abuse; one is just using more highbrow language in an attempt to feign politeness. Avoiding coarse language does not mean you're not being snide or offensive, and people hiding snide commentary in nice prose is one of my pet hates.

comex 14y ago

The popularity of those controversial comments seems to generate a lot of insightful discussion; whatever the merits of the original comments, I enjoy reading debates on Hacker News about C++ or GitHub pull requests.

uuilly 14y ago

A non-trivial percentage of "rock star" software engineers are not capable of behaving themselves. The causes are varied. Some have been so busy getting A's and working upwards that they never formed lateral bonds with their peers. Some have something clinically wrong them. Some have been told they're right so much that they don't know how to behave when they're wrong. Some tie so much of their self worth to the problem they're solving that disagreement becomes a personal insult. Whatever the reason, the software industry repeatedly explains away debilitating personality flaws as a cute quirk or even a benefit. It reminds me of D1 football coaches defending players who behave like animals off the field. There is almost never an acceptable reason for being an asshole. It may be worth it to hire an asshole but that does not absolve that person of being an asshole. It just makes them a smart asshole.