4 ms·

If he were to write an alternative, it would be given undue preference over others. He probably knows this.

by startling 12y ago

ithkuil 12y ago
Some people would indeed prefer to have only one (benevolent) dictator.
- gkya 12y ago
  “Benevolent” is among the least becoming adjectives to Linus' dictatorship.
  - droopyEyelids 12y ago
    I think you're confusing "benevolent" with "deferential" or "polite".
  - kdd44 12y ago
    It's sad that people get so hung up on bashing personality differences (not flaws) that they can't even see the much greater good that some people do. Politeness is just the toleration of stupidity and the acceptance of mediocrity.
    - gkya 12y ago
      kdd44, SHUT THE F*CK UP[1]. And please, go kill yourself, the world will be a better place[2]. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75 [2] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 Edit: No need to be as explicit as Linus to be sarcastic.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
  - dredmorbius 12y ago
    There's a lot of argument over just what that term means. Many moons ago in an organizational behavior / group decisionmaking book whose title I can never keep in mind, I read a fascinating chapter on various group structures for decisionmaking. Of the various models, the one which works best under more circumstances is that in which there is a leadership role (so there's no indecision over what decision has been made or when it's been taken), but that role is collectively assigned based on merits. In other words, the leaders' tenure is at the consent of the group as a whole, and can be transfered. The one decision over which the leader has no effective say (or at least: no more than any other individual) is over the question of leadership. Strikes me as very much the model that's followed by the most successful free software projects.
    - gkya 12y ago
      > Strikes me as very much the model that's followed by the most successful free software projects. I believe Linus learning some manners for himself would hardly slow down neither of Linux or Git, and nor would make him a lesser leader. Seriously, there are better ways of putting things forth, than execrating persons who contribute to Linux/Git for a living, on public mailing lists. Leaders need be responsible of their public speech. Someone who is writing curse words in all caps is not speaking responsibly by definition.
      - dredmorbius 12y ago
        Theo de Raat is another famously short-tempered project leader. In both cases, the result doesn't seem to have hurt what matters: the project themselves and the utility they provide their users. The goal of the projects isn't to protect tender egos. It's to get shit done and make the right decisions. Linus answered one woman who'd criticized his behavior by noting that a key issue for him was making absolutely unambiguously clear how good or bad a given technical suggestion was. And he does that. Here we go: https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912 https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912 Because if you want me to "act professional," I can tell you that I'm not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearing a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm ALSO not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways. As I commented at the time: There's something to be said for being an equal-opportunity asshole, in a fair and balanced manner. And in running the most effective, successful, beneficial, and largest OS development project the world has ever seen. I see Linus's behavior as being an instance of Celine's Second Law: Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine's_laws\#Celine.27s\_Second\_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine's_laws\#Celine.27s\_Sec... "Huh?" you say? But Linus is punishing communication. No. Linus is communicating. He's expressing a clear view of what is or isn't valuable. The punishment isn't in rating the quality of contributions to the kernel, or usefulness of others' participation in the LKML. It's in criticizing the communications methods used to convey that feedback. Yes, it may be insensitive. But fuck sensitivity
dredmorbius 12y ago
Doubtful. We've already got a world with multiple inits. The rationale for adopting systemd is ... troubling. Clearly, Linus has some issues with the team involved, though I don't know whether or not he's also concerned with the deep coupling. Hauling systemd out of udev (or offering a systemd-free alternative) would also make me far happier. Complexity is the enemy of reliability. An expression dating back, I've recently discovered, to January, 1958, and The Economist Newspaper.

If he were to write an alternative, it would be given undue preference over others. He probably knows this.

ithkuil 12y ago

Some people would indeed prefer to have only one (benevolent) dictator.

gkya 12y ago
“Benevolent” is among the least becoming adjectives to Linus' dictatorship.
- droopyEyelids 12y ago
  I think you're confusing "benevolent" with "deferential" or "polite".
- kdd44 12y ago
  It's sad that people get so hung up on bashing personality differences (not flaws) that they can't even see the much greater good that some people do. Politeness is just the toleration of stupidity and the acceptance of mediocrity.
  - gkya 12y ago
    kdd44, SHUT THE F*CK UP[1]. And please, go kill yourself, the world will be a better place[2]. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75 [2] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5 Edit: No need to be as explicit as Linus to be sarcastic.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- dredmorbius 12y ago
  There's a lot of argument over just what that term means. Many moons ago in an organizational behavior / group decisionmaking book whose title I can never keep in mind, I read a fascinating chapter on various group structures for decisionmaking. Of the various models, the one which works best under more circumstances is that in which there is a leadership role (so there's no indecision over what decision has been made or when it's been taken), but that role is collectively assigned based on merits. In other words, the leaders' tenure is at the consent of the group as a whole, and can be transfered. The one decision over which the leader has no effective say (or at least: no more than any other individual) is over the question of leadership. Strikes me as very much the model that's followed by the most successful free software projects.
  - gkya 12y ago
    > Strikes me as very much the model that's followed by the most successful free software projects. I believe Linus learning some manners for himself would hardly slow down neither of Linux or Git, and nor would make him a lesser leader. Seriously, there are better ways of putting things forth, than execrating persons who contribute to Linux/Git for a living, on public mailing lists. Leaders need be responsible of their public speech. Someone who is writing curse words in all caps is not speaking responsibly by definition.
    - dredmorbius 12y ago
      Theo de Raat is another famously short-tempered project leader. In both cases, the result doesn't seem to have hurt what matters: the project themselves and the utility they provide their users. The goal of the projects isn't to protect tender egos. It's to get shit done and make the right decisions. Linus answered one woman who'd criticized his behavior by noting that a key issue for him was making absolutely unambiguously clear how good or bad a given technical suggestion was. And he does that. Here we go: https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912 https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912 Because if you want me to "act professional," I can tell you that I'm not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearing a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm ALSO not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways. As I commented at the time: There's something to be said for being an equal-opportunity asshole, in a fair and balanced manner. And in running the most effective, successful, beneficial, and largest OS development project the world has ever seen. I see Linus's behavior as being an instance of Celine's Second Law: Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine's_laws\#Celine.27s\_Second\_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine's_laws\#Celine.27s\_Sec... "Huh?" you say? But Linus is punishing communication. No. Linus is communicating. He's expressing a clear view of what is or isn't valuable. The punishment isn't in rating the quality of contributions to the kernel, or usefulness of others' participation in the LKML. It's in criticizing the communications methods used to convey that feedback. Yes, it may be insensitive. But fuck sensitivity

dredmorbius 12y ago

Doubtful. We've already got a world with multiple inits. The rationale for adopting systemd is ... troubling. Clearly, Linus has some issues with the team involved, though I don't know whether or not he's also concerned with the deep coupling. Hauling systemd out of udev (or offering a systemd-free alternative) would also make me far happier. Complexity is the enemy of reliability. An expression dating back, I've recently discovered, to January, 1958, and The Economist Newspaper.