5 ms·

I love what Linus is saying here. I feel like some people haven't really internalized the lesson of the schoolyard saying 'sticks and stones will break my bones

by riggins 13y ago

I love what Linus is saying here. I feel like some people haven't really internalized the lesson of the schoolyard saying 'sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me'. I think that saying is deeper than it seems at first blush. It's a reminder that we are 100% in control of how we react to words. We choose how we react to words. You can always choose. Anyone who complains about language is implicitly saying they're unable to control themselves and how they react to words.

snowwrestler 13y ago
> Anyone who complains about language is implicitly saying they're unable to control themselves and how they react to words. The reality is that most people (probably even including you) cannot do this 100%. Total equanimity is something to strive for in our own lives, but it should not be a criteria by which we judge other people. And it should not be an excuse to be a jerk. One of the key insights of working together constructively with other people is that I don't get to decide how other people think. If I want them to do something, I have to get them to see why they should do it, from their own perspective. Abusing them, and then telling them to get over it, usually does not work well.
- riggins 13y ago
  The reality is that most people (probably even including you) cannot do this 100%. All people definitely can do this. They just choose not to. I won't say that I always do, but I try to keep it mind. Its a lesson I really try to internalize. Try this thought experiment. Let's say I show up at your office with a duffel bag filled with $1M cash ... and I said to you, snowwrestler 'I'm now going to make a bunch of nasty and insulting comments to you ... if you can laugh it off with a smile you get this giant bag of cash', I suspect you could find it in you to absolutely ignore everything I said and happily focus on the giant bag of cash sitting in front of you.
  - Ygg2 13y ago
    I know I wouldn't so it's not 100% or at least not at least 100% of people.
  - btilly 13y ago
    All people definitely can do this. They just choose not to. Wrong. The classic demonstration is Phineas Gage. A man who by all accounts had very good self-control until the day that an accident drove a railroad spike through his brain, taking out the frontal lobe that is responsible for said control. After that he lost control. Not through lack of will, but because of physical trauma. The same phenomena has been observed in lots of stroke victims. Moving on, there are a ton of psychiatric conditions which are not even that rare that result in people who have hardwired reactions to words that are out of their conscious control. PTSD. Social anxiety. Manic-depression (at either extreme). And so on. These days we can map out how words get processed and see the short circuit that keeps the frontal lobe out of the loop. It isn't a question of willpower. We know how to treat these conditions and help people regain control. We don't do it by telling people to "try harder". What about normal people? Well it has long been known that any normal person in the grip of strong emotion also loses control. It doesn't matter why they have the strong emotion - someone died, you were in a fight, etc - once you feel the emotion, you have no control. Furthermore every time we go through this pattern, we wind up laying a path that makes it easier to go through the pattern. Afterwards it is easy for people to go through a thought experiment. Say, "I should have done this, said that, held my temper." Blame themselves. Promise they will do better But guess what? They are wrong. Next time they don't do better. Not because of lack of willpower (though that may be an issue), but because human brains don't work in the way we consciously think they work. But note this is not just defeatism. Because it turns out that we can understand these classic patterns we have. And with understanding comes the ability to get better control. But not through having an iron will. Instead through having the self-awareness to know, "When I feel this and hold it in like that the next thing I know I lose control. So I need to pay attention to this early sign and walk away for 10 minutes, then come back and continue."
  - snowwrestler 13y ago
    Yes because you've given me a reason to do so that makes a lot of sense from my perspective. (One of the distinguishing characteristics of money is that it appears advantageous to everyone's perspective.) Edit to add: So because it's so well-compensated, I don't think that's a good example of equanimity. Equanimity means remaining calm and pleasant even when I'm not being paid--or if I'm being asked to pay.
- xradionut 13y ago
  You should enlist in the military and see how well that works. :)
  - mpyne 13y ago
    Well, that's just it. Equanimity in the face of psychological pressure is a valuable skill to have. But it is a skill, it's not free, and the military spends a lot of effort on weeding people out who cannot develop that skill by the end of basic, intermediate, and advanced training schools. And for those of us on the outside, we wouldn't tell a random developer that he should crank out 40 push-ups to prove his worth, like we might in the military. In the military there is what we'd call a bona-fide occupational qualification behind assessing the psychological durability of recruits. Is there such as bona-fide requirement to develop software patches? Should there be? I'll give Linus a pass on this much; his behavior here is well within the norms of the Linux kernel development community and his own previous behavior. He's the Captain of that particular ship and he's not doing anything illegal, nor does he intend personal injury, so at some point it's easier to concede that he will run that ship the way he wants and put on asbestos underwear, than to try to change both his behavior and the resultant mailing list culture. But I think it's important to keep in mind that his kind of behavior must be very much the exception to the rule for software development, open or otherwise. If you breed a culture of aggressiveness then you must be ready to handle the people you draw in from that. It works for the military, it seems to work for the LKML, but I would be hesitant to hold it up as a general model.
    - xradionut 13y ago
      I'd rather have people express how they feel directly instead of "professionally" backstab or marginalize me. And the military doesn't breed "aggressiveness" outside of specific services and roles that require it. It does demand an inordinate "attention to detail" due to the fact lives are on the line, whether that be on ships, planes or just normal activities. This "attention to detail" is also seen among other professions, but seldom in software outside of NASA/avionics/medical/etc... Linus has laid out guidelines and expectations which while demanding, can be followed. If you can't test your code nor follow a checklist, then maybe you shouldn't submit patches to him. It's the military equivalent of passing barracks/quarters inspections, it should be elementary for professionals.
mpyne 13y ago
Words are just words. They merely convey the message. But the message itself can be harmful. Psychological abuse is just as real to the brain as physical abuse is to the skin and muscle beneath. If messages meant nothing then there would be no reason to talk about hate speech, sexually abusive speech, or the many, many other harmful messages people can and do convey to others. It's not my job to build an impenetrable moat around my psyche just to survive other people being abusive.
- riggins 13y ago
  we'll have to agree to disagree. The fundamental claim that I simply don't accept is that people can't handle words. I disagree. People have the capacity to handle anything that is said to them. Psychological abuse is just as real to the brain as physical abuse is to the skin and muscle beneath. a. I'm skeptical of this claim. Would like to see your source b. Only to the extent you allow it. That's one of the defining features of being a human. I can actually say to myself 'pull it together, words are meaningless' or 'this guy is an ignorant, why would I care what he says'.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    > People have the capacity to handle anything that is said to them...I can actually say to myself 'pull it together, words are meaningless' or 'this guy is an ignorant, why would I care what he says'. If words are meaningless why would saying anything to yourself change your state? It sounds like you are saying that you can use your own words to yourself to combat the harm of someone's words. That's very much different than saying that words have no meaning. In fact, you are saying that people's words impose a cost on you. The fact that people have "capacity" to handle things said to them means a resource is being used.
  - Confusion 13y ago
    This response lacks empathy and imagination. Imagine being a child that for as long as he can remember has been told by his mother that he's worthless and that she should have had an abortion. You think that's 'not real' and that it only hurts 'to the extent he allows it'? Not everyone has grown up in the enviable position of being strong-willed and independent of thought, especially considering societal expectations. Suggesting anyone can just 'grow a thick skin' is as silly as suggesting you can change your gender by willing it.
6d0debc071 13y ago
The counterpoint of believing that the pen is mightier than the sword is the fact that, while sticks and stones may break my bones, words sent thousands to the death camps. If you choose not to react to language then I can make you look weak or evil or whatever in front of those who do, and by the time I decide to make things physical you'll have no-one ready to help you. That's the lesson of the school yard. The lesson of the world beyond the school yard, as above, is even more brutal. Edit: Point being that being verbally attacked scares and upsets me/many others, and it seems to me that's a perfectly reasonable response to have.
Borogravia 13y ago
Yet he flips out when people use harmless little words to criticize him for being a huge prick.

by riggins 13y ago

snowwrestler 13y ago

> Anyone who complains about language is implicitly saying they're unable to control themselves and how they react to words. The reality is that most people (probably even including you) cannot do this 100%. Total equanimity is something to strive for in our own lives, but it should not be a criteria by which we judge other people. And it should not be an excuse to be a jerk. One of the key insights of working together constructively with other people is that I don't get to decide how other people think. If I want them to do something, I have to get them to see why they should do it, from their own perspective. Abusing them, and then telling them to get over it, usually does not work well.

riggins 13y ago
The reality is that most people (probably even including you) cannot do this 100%. All people definitely can do this. They just choose not to. I won't say that I always do, but I try to keep it mind. Its a lesson I really try to internalize. Try this thought experiment. Let's say I show up at your office with a duffel bag filled with $1M cash ... and I said to you, snowwrestler 'I'm now going to make a bunch of nasty and insulting comments to you ... if you can laugh it off with a smile you get this giant bag of cash', I suspect you could find it in you to absolutely ignore everything I said and happily focus on the giant bag of cash sitting in front of you.
- Ygg2 13y ago
  I know I wouldn't so it's not 100% or at least not at least 100% of people.
- btilly 13y ago
  All people definitely can do this. They just choose not to. Wrong. The classic demonstration is Phineas Gage. A man who by all accounts had very good self-control until the day that an accident drove a railroad spike through his brain, taking out the frontal lobe that is responsible for said control. After that he lost control. Not through lack of will, but because of physical trauma. The same phenomena has been observed in lots of stroke victims. Moving on, there are a ton of psychiatric conditions which are not even that rare that result in people who have hardwired reactions to words that are out of their conscious control. PTSD. Social anxiety. Manic-depression (at either extreme). And so on. These days we can map out how words get processed and see the short circuit that keeps the frontal lobe out of the loop. It isn't a question of willpower. We know how to treat these conditions and help people regain control. We don't do it by telling people to "try harder". What about normal people? Well it has long been known that any normal person in the grip of strong emotion also loses control. It doesn't matter why they have the strong emotion - someone died, you were in a fight, etc - once you feel the emotion, you have no control. Furthermore every time we go through this pattern, we wind up laying a path that makes it easier to go through the pattern. Afterwards it is easy for people to go through a thought experiment. Say, "I should have done this, said that, held my temper." Blame themselves. Promise they will do better But guess what? They are wrong. Next time they don't do better. Not because of lack of willpower (though that may be an issue), but because human brains don't work in the way we consciously think they work. But note this is not just defeatism. Because it turns out that we can understand these classic patterns we have. And with understanding comes the ability to get better control. But not through having an iron will. Instead through having the self-awareness to know, "When I feel this and hold it in like that the next thing I know I lose control. So I need to pay attention to this early sign and walk away for 10 minutes, then come back and continue."
- snowwrestler 13y ago
  Yes because you've given me a reason to do so that makes a lot of sense from my perspective. (One of the distinguishing characteristics of money is that it appears advantageous to everyone's perspective.) Edit to add: So because it's so well-compensated, I don't think that's a good example of equanimity. Equanimity means remaining calm and pleasant even when I'm not being paid--or if I'm being asked to pay.
xradionut 13y ago
You should enlist in the military and see how well that works. :)
- mpyne 13y ago
  Well, that's just it. Equanimity in the face of psychological pressure is a valuable skill to have. But it is a skill, it's not free, and the military spends a lot of effort on weeding people out who cannot develop that skill by the end of basic, intermediate, and advanced training schools. And for those of us on the outside, we wouldn't tell a random developer that he should crank out 40 push-ups to prove his worth, like we might in the military. In the military there is what we'd call a bona-fide occupational qualification behind assessing the psychological durability of recruits. Is there such as bona-fide requirement to develop software patches? Should there be? I'll give Linus a pass on this much; his behavior here is well within the norms of the Linux kernel development community and his own previous behavior. He's the Captain of that particular ship and he's not doing anything illegal, nor does he intend personal injury, so at some point it's easier to concede that he will run that ship the way he wants and put on asbestos underwear, than to try to change both his behavior and the resultant mailing list culture. But I think it's important to keep in mind that his kind of behavior must be very much the exception to the rule for software development, open or otherwise. If you breed a culture of aggressiveness then you must be ready to handle the people you draw in from that. It works for the military, it seems to work for the LKML, but I would be hesitant to hold it up as a general model.
  - xradionut 13y ago
    I'd rather have people express how they feel directly instead of "professionally" backstab or marginalize me. And the military doesn't breed "aggressiveness" outside of specific services and roles that require it. It does demand an inordinate "attention to detail" due to the fact lives are on the line, whether that be on ships, planes or just normal activities. This "attention to detail" is also seen among other professions, but seldom in software outside of NASA/avionics/medical/etc... Linus has laid out guidelines and expectations which while demanding, can be followed. If you can't test your code nor follow a checklist, then maybe you shouldn't submit patches to him. It's the military equivalent of passing barracks/quarters inspections, it should be elementary for professionals.

mpyne 13y ago

Words are just words. They merely convey the message. But the message itself can be harmful. Psychological abuse is just as real to the brain as physical abuse is to the skin and muscle beneath. If messages meant nothing then there would be no reason to talk about hate speech, sexually abusive speech, or the many, many other harmful messages people can and do convey to others. It's not my job to build an impenetrable moat around my psyche just to survive other people being abusive.

riggins 13y ago
we'll have to agree to disagree. The fundamental claim that I simply don't accept is that people can't handle words. I disagree. People have the capacity to handle anything that is said to them. Psychological abuse is just as real to the brain as physical abuse is to the skin and muscle beneath. a. I'm skeptical of this claim. Would like to see your source b. Only to the extent you allow it. That's one of the defining features of being a human. I can actually say to myself 'pull it together, words are meaningless' or 'this guy is an ignorant, why would I care what he says'.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > People have the capacity to handle anything that is said to them...I can actually say to myself 'pull it together, words are meaningless' or 'this guy is an ignorant, why would I care what he says'. If words are meaningless why would saying anything to yourself change your state? It sounds like you are saying that you can use your own words to yourself to combat the harm of someone's words. That's very much different than saying that words have no meaning. In fact, you are saying that people's words impose a cost on you. The fact that people have "capacity" to handle things said to them means a resource is being used.
- Confusion 13y ago
  This response lacks empathy and imagination. Imagine being a child that for as long as he can remember has been told by his mother that he's worthless and that she should have had an abortion. You think that's 'not real' and that it only hurts 'to the extent he allows it'? Not everyone has grown up in the enviable position of being strong-willed and independent of thought, especially considering societal expectations. Suggesting anyone can just 'grow a thick skin' is as silly as suggesting you can change your gender by willing it.

6d0debc071 13y ago

The counterpoint of believing that the pen is mightier than the sword is the fact that, while sticks and stones may break my bones, words sent thousands to the death camps. If you choose not to react to language then I can make you look weak or evil or whatever in front of those who do, and by the time I decide to make things physical you'll have no-one ready to help you. That's the lesson of the school yard. The lesson of the world beyond the school yard, as above, is even more brutal. Edit: Point being that being verbally attacked scares and upsets me/many others, and it seems to me that's a perfectly reasonable response to have.

Borogravia 13y ago

Yet he flips out when people use harmless little words to criticize him for being a huge prick.