5 ms·

This is a very interesting summary indeed, however I think matters are simpler and noone needs to dive that deep. Unfortunatelly, EVERYONE, from all parties, f

by gtsop 1y ago

This is a very interesting summary indeed, however I think matters are simpler and noone needs to dive that deep. Unfortunatelly, EVERYONE, from all parties, fire shots for the wrong reasons, which perverts the discussion. When you say to people to not use GOS because the lead dev is paranoid or the community is hostile you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The value GOS brings is undisputable. The quirkiness of the leadership is also undisputable. Let's decouple the two. If you wish for the community to get better, become yourself the better contact point amd generally focus on suggestion on that matter. Don't say to people to not use arguably the most secure android rom! I used to respect Rossmann a lot, but he fell in my eyes both for the LTT and the GOS incident. I have been watching LTT since a kid and I know that his has grown to be a jerk without looking at his private communications, but his competitors fired shots at him for the wrong reasons (honey case) and so did Rossmann, riding the wave. If you want to criticize someone for being a jerk do it, but do it for the right reasons, don't muddy the waters by injecting other stuff in the discussion.

bernoufakis 1y ago
> When you say to people to not use GOS because the lead dev is paranoid or the community is hostile you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The value GOS brings is undisputable. The quirkiness of the leadership is also undisputable. Let's decouple the two. If you wish for the community to get better, become yourself the better contact point amd generally focus on suggestion on that matter. Don't say to people to not use arguably the most secure android rom! It's one thing to separate the artist from the art, but I think that analogy does not apply when it comes to e.g. an operating system which essentially handles all of your private data. If anything, not being able to separate the art from the artist is the exact reason why GOS exists, the artist being "Google" and all their controversial practices. (Edit: or a simpler analogy, would you trust the food (art) of a cook (artist) that threatens to ruin your life ?) The OOP is entitled to express his informed opinion and even provided what he based it upon. As a user, I think that is important context when it comes to picking something as sensitive as an OS. > I used to respect Rossmann a lot, but he fell in my eyes both for the LTT and the GOS incident. I have been watching LTT since a kid and I know that his has grown to be a jerk without looking at his private communications, but his competitors fired shots at him for the wrong reasons (honey case) and so did Rossmann, riding the wave. I happen to have a similar background as far as LTT (weekly WAN show and what not) and Rossmann are concerned As I mentioned before I (unfortunately) went into the GOS incident rabbit hole and overall still think Rossmann was principled. As far as Rossmann's criticism of Linus about the LTT Honey case, perhaps he could have had a more nuanced approach, yes. Regarding the BilletLabs cooling block, or the "Trust Me Bro", his criticism was substantive, and came from his own business background on dealing with customers (although you can argue that Rossmann has high standards). I don't think Rossmann "fired shots for the wrong reasons", namely since LTT has publicly acknowledge the issues. > If you want to criticize someone for being a jerk do it, but do it for the right reasons, don't muddy the waters by injecting other stuff in the discussion. Just curious, but who is muddying waters, and how ?
- gtsop 1y ago
  > Just curious, but who is muddying waters, and how ? In the context of this whole rabbit hole, pretty much all of the parties. When you bring someone's dirt put in the public, not to support an argument but just to attack them because you don't like them, uou are muddying the waters. MegaLag did it for Linus Steve did for Linus Luis did for Linus Linus did for Steve Linus did for Luis Henry did for Daniel Luis did for Daniel And of course Daniel pretty much does for anyone :p These were not conversations based on logic, each had a reason to dislike the other and dag up dirt for clicks and for leverage.
  - bernoufakis 1y ago
    > When you bring someone's dirt put in the public, not to support an argument but just to attack them because you don't like them, uou are muddying the waters. To take the specific case of Rossmann, how is he muddying the water ? If anything, he is clarifying his position on stopping using GOS. It is important context, not "muddying the waters". You yourself say that: > And of course Daniel pretty much does for anyone :p And Rossmann brought up the receipt to corroborate the GOS developer hostile behavior toward him, which was his argument. And even if you take it further back to origin, the "Informative but unfortunate" comment, this was not targeting GOS's quality and claim of security. The argument in that specific case was the questionable behavior of the leadership, which you seem to agree was not a "conversation based on logic". If some people can't be reasoned with, what is Rossmann supposed to do ? He "agreed to disagreed" and cut contact with the dev, kept the GOS situation under the lid as it was still a project he liked, but that was apparently not enough to keep that developer at bay ...
    - gtsop 1y ago
      > If some people can't be reasoned with, what is Rossmann supposed to do ? Just stop interacting? When you have an argument with your colleague, do you go on twitter and post all your conversations and tell everyone how irrational he is? When you argue with a relative do you make an 1hour long video detailing how they missbehaved? Why did Luis felt the need to make content on his popular channel to expose someone with problematic behavior? Clicks. Money. And on top of that he is attacking his work which is actually very valuable. I don't care if Luis is on the right side of the argument. If he was chatting me up on the bus and told me about it, i would be glad to know. Attacking a person on public for money and leverage is bs. Edit: Especially in the case of Daniel, if you have made the conclusion that a person is trully paranoid, this is a clinical situation, do you expect to "fix" them by exposing them? Or are you throwing more gas to the fire?

by gtsop 1y ago

bernoufakis 1y ago

> When you say to people to not use GOS because the lead dev is paranoid or the community is hostile you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The value GOS brings is undisputable. The quirkiness of the leadership is also undisputable. Let's decouple the two. If you wish for the community to get better, become yourself the better contact point amd generally focus on suggestion on that matter. Don't say to people to not use arguably the most secure android rom! It's one thing to separate the artist from the art, but I think that analogy does not apply when it comes to e.g. an operating system which essentially handles all of your private data. If anything, not being able to separate the art from the artist is the exact reason why GOS exists, the artist being "Google" and all their controversial practices. (Edit: or a simpler analogy, would you trust the food (art) of a cook (artist) that threatens to ruin your life ?) The OOP is entitled to express his informed opinion and even provided what he based it upon. As a user, I think that is important context when it comes to picking something as sensitive as an OS. > I used to respect Rossmann a lot, but he fell in my eyes both for the LTT and the GOS incident. I have been watching LTT since a kid and I know that his has grown to be a jerk without looking at his private communications, but his competitors fired shots at him for the wrong reasons (honey case) and so did Rossmann, riding the wave. I happen to have a similar background as far as LTT (weekly WAN show and what not) and Rossmann are concerned As I mentioned before I (unfortunately) went into the GOS incident rabbit hole and overall still think Rossmann was principled. As far as Rossmann's criticism of Linus about the LTT Honey case, perhaps he could have had a more nuanced approach, yes. Regarding the BilletLabs cooling block, or the "Trust Me Bro", his criticism was substantive, and came from his own business background on dealing with customers (although you can argue that Rossmann has high standards). I don't think Rossmann "fired shots for the wrong reasons", namely since LTT has publicly acknowledge the issues. > If you want to criticize someone for being a jerk do it, but do it for the right reasons, don't muddy the waters by injecting other stuff in the discussion. Just curious, but who is muddying waters, and how ?

gtsop 1y ago
> Just curious, but who is muddying waters, and how ? In the context of this whole rabbit hole, pretty much all of the parties. When you bring someone's dirt put in the public, not to support an argument but just to attack them because you don't like them, uou are muddying the waters. MegaLag did it for Linus Steve did for Linus Luis did for Linus Linus did for Steve Linus did for Luis Henry did for Daniel Luis did for Daniel And of course Daniel pretty much does for anyone :p These were not conversations based on logic, each had a reason to dislike the other and dag up dirt for clicks and for leverage.
- bernoufakis 1y ago
  > When you bring someone's dirt put in the public, not to support an argument but just to attack them because you don't like them, uou are muddying the waters. To take the specific case of Rossmann, how is he muddying the water ? If anything, he is clarifying his position on stopping using GOS. It is important context, not "muddying the waters". You yourself say that: > And of course Daniel pretty much does for anyone :p And Rossmann brought up the receipt to corroborate the GOS developer hostile behavior toward him, which was his argument. And even if you take it further back to origin, the "Informative but unfortunate" comment, this was not targeting GOS's quality and claim of security. The argument in that specific case was the questionable behavior of the leadership, which you seem to agree was not a "conversation based on logic". If some people can't be reasoned with, what is Rossmann supposed to do ? He "agreed to disagreed" and cut contact with the dev, kept the GOS situation under the lid as it was still a project he liked, but that was apparently not enough to keep that developer at bay ...
  - gtsop 1y ago
    > If some people can't be reasoned with, what is Rossmann supposed to do ? Just stop interacting? When you have an argument with your colleague, do you go on twitter and post all your conversations and tell everyone how irrational he is? When you argue with a relative do you make an 1hour long video detailing how they missbehaved? Why did Luis felt the need to make content on his popular channel to expose someone with problematic behavior? Clicks. Money. And on top of that he is attacking his work which is actually very valuable. I don't care if Luis is on the right side of the argument. If he was chatting me up on the bus and told me about it, i would be glad to know. Attacking a person on public for money and leverage is bs. Edit: Especially in the case of Daniel, if you have made the conclusion that a person is trully paranoid, this is a clinical situation, do you expect to "fix" them by exposing them? Or are you throwing more gas to the fire?