4 ms·

You must have missed the other news this week. Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality is certainly against freedom and any ki

You must have missed the other news this week. Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality is certainly against freedom and any kind of ethics worthy of being called that.

jvdvegt 2y ago
I missed it, apparently. Link?
- Symbiote 2y ago
  They banned people employed by sanctioned organisations from being maintainers. This one worked for a company making hardware for the Russian military. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41932225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41932225
  - safety1st 2y ago
    This is obviously unfortunate but I think the issue is a lot bigger than Linux. It should serve as a reminder that there are no liberals in war. The civil liberties you take for granted, in a major war, they will be gone. They will die in one day and it will take decades to get them back if ever. Remember that in WW2 America was throwing Japanese citizens into internment camps and the other side was doing far worse. Things that are unfathomable today but in a war with sufficiently high stakes they will happen again and more.
    - fjdjshsh 2y ago
      Even at war, the USA was still much more "liberal" than Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan: for starters, they didn't put any German citizens / German descendants in a concentration camp. The Japanese descendants/citizens living in the USA were treated different because of racism. You can argue that having a racist government isn't compatible with being "liberal", but it's a matter of degree. Having a democracy that doesn't allow non whites to vote is still more "liberal" than having a monarchy / dictatorship
      - philwelch 2y ago
        > for starters, they didn't put any German citizens / German descendants in a concentration camp False: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_Americans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_America...
        AnimalMuppet 2y ago
        Define "concentration camp". If you mean "a place where many of a certain category of people are held", then yes, we did. If you mean "place where many of a certain category of people are held and killed", then no, we didn't. Technically, the first definition is at least as correct as the second one. But colloquially, the second one is what many people understand. You cannot compare the camps that German citizens were held in by the US to Dachau.
        philwelch 2y ago
        I actually agree with you that the term “concentration camp” is inflammatory and misleading when applied to the internment camps used to hold Axis citizens and Japanese-Americans. But the comment I was replying to was attempting to draw a contrast between the Japanese internment and the treatment of German citizens, when in fact German and Italian citizens were interned during the war. In fact I’ve actually visited one of the internment camps, in Montana.
  - berdario 2y ago
    The company in question entered bankruptcy in August 2023 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_CPU#Bankruptcy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_CPU#Bankruptcy I'm not arguing for/against the exclusions due to sanctions. I think the benefit of banning people who used to work for a banned entity is minimal, but after all, if they are still using an email address provided by that sanctioned entity (alumni access?) of course they haven't disentangled themselves fully from that entity
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    This is not true and you know it. Re-read Linus' comment if you think this is about sanctioned organizations. And in any case, the leader of an open project should do everything to keep the project open, including defying an immoral and unjust law, or at the very least doing bare minimum compliance. They certainly shouldn't happily jump on the bandwagon.
pvaldes 2y ago
> Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality "Linux" is not banning anybody. They must comply with the sanctions against Putin regime that many governments in the world raised, in response to insane Putin's behavior. Linux is not banning people based on nationality, is banning people based on their employers that is a different question. Linux has every right to ban somebody that would be working for a cartel, for example. This is a win-win for the people banned also, because protects them to be targeted and forced by the Russian regime to participate on war crimes. Calling about "mafreedom!" and "your lack of ethics" just looks deranged and out of the reality. "mafreedom to kill you (and you must help me to build the bombs or are a very bad guy)" is preschool level material. Not even funny as a joke. They really think that we are so stupid? > Linux lacks ethics Since 2022 the Russian president is sending 1000 Russians a day to a sure death, could stop the carnage at any time, and couldn't care less about it. Most Russians support him and don't care also. I will not accept any lesson on ethics.
- berdario 2y ago
  > This is a win-win for the people banned also, because they are in a vulnerable position to be forced by the Russian regime to commit crimes. Nonsense. If your concern is that a maintainer might be strongarmed into getting surreptitious changes in the linux kernel, that's a misplaced concern because: 1- the maintainer in question didn't have access to approve changes across the whole linux kernel, but only on the drivers that they were maintaining (mainly Baikal electronics hardware, I assume. I.e. the Russian government could sabotage the drivers for hardware developed inside Russia itself, not exactly something that we'd truly have to worry about) 2- just because an individual, working in the open and with a clear/known identity (and association with a bankrupt Russian hardware design firm) has been excluded, it doesn't mean that a government might give up trying to sneak in changes. They can just create new personas (just like with "Jia Tan" of xz fame) I understand that the Linux kernel got their hand forced, but this is just stopping a volunteer from contributing (and feeling welcome), in an open source project in which they had been involved for several years. It's a win for the Linux kernel (because they are not going to get a slap on their wrists), but it's not a win for the affected individuals
beretguy 2y ago
Cry me a river.

You must have missed the other news this week. Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality is certainly against freedom and any kind of ethics worthy of being called that.

jvdvegt 2y ago

I missed it, apparently. Link?

Symbiote 2y ago
They banned people employed by sanctioned organisations from being maintainers. This one worked for a company making hardware for the Russian military. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41932225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41932225
- safety1st 2y ago
  This is obviously unfortunate but I think the issue is a lot bigger than Linux. It should serve as a reminder that there are no liberals in war. The civil liberties you take for granted, in a major war, they will be gone. They will die in one day and it will take decades to get them back if ever. Remember that in WW2 America was throwing Japanese citizens into internment camps and the other side was doing far worse. Things that are unfathomable today but in a war with sufficiently high stakes they will happen again and more.
  - fjdjshsh 2y ago
    Even at war, the USA was still much more "liberal" than Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan: for starters, they didn't put any German citizens / German descendants in a concentration camp. The Japanese descendants/citizens living in the USA were treated different because of racism. You can argue that having a racist government isn't compatible with being "liberal", but it's a matter of degree. Having a democracy that doesn't allow non whites to vote is still more "liberal" than having a monarchy / dictatorship
    - philwelch 2y ago
      > for starters, they didn't put any German citizens / German descendants in a concentration camp False: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_Americans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_America...
      - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
        Define "concentration camp". If you mean "a place where many of a certain category of people are held", then yes, we did. If you mean "place where many of a certain category of people are held and killed", then no, we didn't. Technically, the first definition is at least as correct as the second one. But colloquially, the second one is what many people understand. You cannot compare the camps that German citizens were held in by the US to Dachau.
        philwelch 2y ago
        I actually agree with you that the term “concentration camp” is inflammatory and misleading when applied to the internment camps used to hold Axis citizens and Japanese-Americans. But the comment I was replying to was attempting to draw a contrast between the Japanese internment and the treatment of German citizens, when in fact German and Italian citizens were interned during the war. In fact I’ve actually visited one of the internment camps, in Montana.
- berdario 2y ago
  The company in question entered bankruptcy in August 2023 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_CPU#Bankruptcy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_CPU#Bankruptcy I'm not arguing for/against the exclusions due to sanctions. I think the benefit of banning people who used to work for a banned entity is minimal, but after all, if they are still using an email address provided by that sanctioned entity (alumni access?) of course they haven't disentangled themselves fully from that entity
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  This is not true and you know it. Re-read Linus' comment if you think this is about sanctioned organizations. And in any case, the leader of an open project should do everything to keep the project open, including defying an immoral and unjust law, or at the very least doing bare minimum compliance. They certainly shouldn't happily jump on the bandwagon.

pvaldes 2y ago

> Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality "Linux" is not banning anybody. They must comply with the sanctions against Putin regime that many governments in the world raised, in response to insane Putin's behavior. Linux is not banning people based on nationality, is banning people based on their employers that is a different question. Linux has every right to ban somebody that would be working for a cartel, for example. This is a win-win for the people banned also, because protects them to be targeted and forced by the Russian regime to participate on war crimes. Calling about "mafreedom!" and "your lack of ethics" just looks deranged and out of the reality. "mafreedom to kill you (and you must help me to build the bombs or are a very bad guy)" is preschool level material. Not even funny as a joke. They really think that we are so stupid? > Linux lacks ethics Since 2022 the Russian president is sending 1000 Russians a day to a sure death, could stop the carnage at any time, and couldn't care less about it. Most Russians support him and don't care also. I will not accept any lesson on ethics.

berdario 2y ago
> This is a win-win for the people banned also, because they are in a vulnerable position to be forced by the Russian regime to commit crimes. Nonsense. If your concern is that a maintainer might be strongarmed into getting surreptitious changes in the linux kernel, that's a misplaced concern because: 1- the maintainer in question didn't have access to approve changes across the whole linux kernel, but only on the drivers that they were maintaining (mainly Baikal electronics hardware, I assume. I.e. the Russian government could sabotage the drivers for hardware developed inside Russia itself, not exactly something that we'd truly have to worry about) 2- just because an individual, working in the open and with a clear/known identity (and association with a bankrupt Russian hardware design firm) has been excluded, it doesn't mean that a government might give up trying to sneak in changes. They can just create new personas (just like with "Jia Tan" of xz fame) I understand that the Linux kernel got their hand forced, but this is just stopping a volunteer from contributing (and feeling welcome), in an open source project in which they had been involved for several years. It's a win for the Linux kernel (because they are not going to get a slap on their wrists), but it's not a win for the affected individuals

beretguy 2y ago

Cry me a river.