altkiwi01
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
According to his wikipedia article he developed/maintains the userspace utilities for ext2/3/4.
Diseased Open Source Software Community - it's about ethics in Code of Conducts
- Thread starter CrunkLord420
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- May 25, 2013
Wow that didn't take long at all.
Let's see if the Linnux community will fall in line as fast all all the others.
I'm amazed at how effective guilt is on upper middle class white people. Accuse them of any of the seven deadly 'isms and they fold like wet paper and will grovel at their accuser feet for forgiveness.
Me thinks the days of Linnux as an open community are coming to a close. How soon until we see the removal of open BSD for crypto locked ABI?
Not long is my bet.
Let's see if the Linnux community will fall in line as fast all all the others.
I'm amazed at how effective guilt is on upper middle class white people. Accuse them of any of the seven deadly 'isms and they fold like wet paper and will grovel at their accuser feet for forgiveness.
Me thinks the days of Linnux as an open community are coming to a close. How soon until we see the removal of open BSD for crypto locked ABI?
Not long is my bet.
CaptainuWu
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2018
Linus is an asshole, because anyone who happens to work on HIS kernel is a moron.
Q
QI 541
Guest
kiwifarms.net
The past decade should have taught you that the community doesn't matter. They can always replace the community if they want.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2018
I remember, when I was running a tabletop group, establishing a code of conduct.
It fit on a 3x5 card in big letters, and (amusingly enough) was a restatement of Wheaton's Law: don't be an asshole.
That's all that's needed, really. Don't. Be. A. Fuckwit. You don't need complex codes of behavior.
It fit on a 3x5 card in big letters, and (amusingly enough) was a restatement of Wheaton's Law: don't be an asshole.
That's all that's needed, really. Don't. Be. A. Fuckwit. You don't need complex codes of behavior.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Which others would those be? You mean fall into line like gamers and comics nerds? I hope they do fall into line like gamers and comics nerds.
You would be correct if CoCs actually did anything to solve that problem. They don't.
CoCs don't magically stop people being mean to each other. All they do is make it easier to punish people after the fact. Instead of judging the nuances of each situation people end up saying "CoC violation, person I don't like hurt my feelings and there's no way you can prove otherwise". At that point it just becomes a popularity contest. 100% politics, 0% facts.
It should go without saying that in a healthy, productive community, conflict that actually requires intervention should be so rare there is no need to have a streamlined process. The only thing CoCs do is promote drama and put out a welcome mat for attention whores and thought police.
As for the behavior of Linus specifically, who actually cares? Nobody is forcing you to contribute to Linux. If you don't like how Linus behaves then find another project or find another job. In the end of the day he's the one accepting sole responsibility for everything that goes into the kernel. That fact that he takes that responsibility seriously and is still so passionate about the project even after he stopped counting the millions pouring into his bank account is actually a very good thing. In my opinion.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2016
I'm not sure I can bear the inevitable WaPo "FOSS Is Primarily a Misogynistic/Transphobic/Islamaphobic/Bigoted Movement - And Why Israel Is To Blame" article.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2013
Oh certainly. I think a vague warning, up front, to not be a dick, and then a benevolent dictator to enforce things on their own terms is most effective.
Committees, like CoC generally suggest, are inherently political and bring out the worst SJW power grabbers. You need a single person, perhaps supported by lieutenants, to have the final say.
Linux is not just a one-off, hobby project. It's an important part of lots of infrastructure people rely on.
Open source does not mean business free.
You don't get to have a project as big as Linux without lots of money and support. Linus isn't obliged to do anything, but I would imagine nine times out of ten, people who grow a project that large will give at least some thought to their impact on others.
Like I pointed out, Linus' approach in dealing with people (well, and the lessons his underlings have learned from him) have made Linux development less effective than it could be, by scaring off users and contributors.
Depending on how a project is organized (who owns the trademarks, repos, etc), they might always have the option to fuck up the project to various degrees. But I don't think most people want to do that.
CIA Nigger
Not a fed, just a random object on the street.
Retired Staff
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 15, 2017
Licensing stuff can be a total mess with contributors, especially if the license is changed. The original MAME license said that commercial use was prohibited, but after said license caused issues some of which were pointed out by some devs when the relicensing effort started leading to flamewars between devs, the MAME people decided to relicense MAME under a mix of the GPL, 3 clause BSD, and LGPL. The effort involved contacting just about every single MAME contributor and asking them to relicense it under their choice of license. Surprisingly, this effort went well. In 2016 with only around 2-3 drivers being removed and some being rewritten by other devs, MAME 0.172 was released as GPL licensed.
That's really the closest thing I can think of to this situation. If developers go through with this it will get messy all around, as both sides weaponize this. It's not just going to be some guy who got kicked for saying something on Twitter doing this, you're going to be seeing more of this from the "I'm not fixing this because Intel isn't woke" type crowds.
An article from a not-so-reputable site has been making rounds around the Linux community saying code reversion would be devastating.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
In some cases, I'd say he's driven off the kind of people who should be driven off because they're fucking useless.
But apparently, he's also treated some fairly valuable contributors in rude ways.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
The vast majority of serious Linux contributors are paid, and it's been that way for years, so it isn't really relevant to say that Linus is driving off contributors.
When people have priorities assigned to them by the company they work for, I think a maintainer who is tough and not arbitrary in his criticism of incoming patches is a positive benefit to the project. The work is going to get done no matter what, and it just ensures the quality is up to par.
When people have priorities assigned to them by the company they work for, I think a maintainer who is tough and not arbitrary in his criticism of incoming patches is a positive benefit to the project. The work is going to get done no matter what, and it just ensures the quality is up to par.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
https://lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/
Linux powers the internet, many of your appliances, and the Android in your pocket. A controversy over politics is now seeing some of its developers threatening to withdraw the license to all of their code, potentially destroying or making the whole Linux kernel unusable for a very long time.
An open letter posted to the Linux Kernel Mailing List explains:
Date Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:28:14 +0000
From unconditionedwitness@redchan ...
Subject Re: A Plea to Unfuck our Codes of Conduct
Regarding those who are ejected from the Linux Kernel Community after
this CoC:
Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their
property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant
from (regarding their property (code)) .
The GPL version 2 lacks a no-rescission clause (the GPL version 3 has
such a clause: to attempt furnish defendants with an estoppel defense,
the Linux Kernel is licensed under version 2, however, as are the past
contributions).
When the defendants ignore the rescission and continue using the
plaintiff's code, the plaintiff can sue under the copyright statute.
Banned contributors _should_ do this (note: plaintiff is to register
their copyright prior to filing suit, the copyright does not have to be
registered at the time of the violation however)
Additionally when said banned contributors joined the Linux team, they
were under the impression that it was a meritocracy: in-fact this belief
was stated or ratified by those within the governing body regarding
Linux when the contributors began their work (whatever that body was at
that time, it could have been simply Linus, or Linus and a few
associates).
The remuneration for the work was implied to be, or perhaps stated, to
be fame as-well as a potential increase in the contributors stature, in
addition to membership in the Linux Kernel club or association, or
whatever it is that the Linux Kernel Community actually is (which a
court may determine... it is something, suffice to say).
Thusly for work, consideration was promised by (Linus? Others? There are
years of mailing list archives with which to determine).
And now that consideration has been clawed-back and the contributors
image has been tarnished.
Thus the worker did work, however the other side of the implied, or
perhaps written (email memorandums), understanding has been violated
(once the contributor has been banned under the new non-meritocratic
"CoC").
Damages could be recovered under: breach of contract, quazi-contract,
libel, false-light. (services rendered for the contractual claims,
future lost income for the libel claims)
In addition to copyright claims. (statutory damages, profits)
For greatest effect, all rescission should be done at once in a bloc.
(With other banned contributors).
Contributors: You were promised something, you laboured for that
promise, and now the promise has become a lie. You have remedies
available to you now, as-well as in the close future .
Additionally, regarding those who promoted the Code of Conduct to be
used against the linux kernel contributors, knowing full well the effect
it would have and desiring those effects; recovery for the ejected
contributors via a tortious interference claim may be possible.
"PLEASE DON'T"
If carried out, ramifications could include large parts of the internet being left vulnerable to exploits, and companies around the world might even inherit bundles of unwanted legal liabilities.
LULZ.com is currently reaching out to experts (including Richard M. Stallman) to ascertain the viability of the plan. This is a developing story.
The controversy
Activists from the feminist and LGBTQIA+ communities have been trying to force the Linux project to join the Contributor Covenant since at least 2015. The Contributor Covenant is an agreement to implement a special Code of Conduct (frequently CoC from now on) aimed at changing the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming. CC’s Code of Conduct is controversial particularly because it allows anyone to be banned from contributing code for any reason, usually with no mechanism for oversight or accountability.
On September 16 the pro-CoC side got their wish–Linux had officially committed to implementing and obeying the CC Code of Conduct–and they immediately set about using it to remove top Linux coders. Sage Sharp, who describes theyself as a “diversity & inclusion consultant, hufflepuff, non-binary agender trans masculine” and has 7k followers, cites GeekFeminismWiki and targets Google’s Theo Ts’o with accusations of being a rape apologist:
Many twitter users pointed out the apparent irony.
https://archive.is/yTtWc
https://archive.is/bltye
https://archive.is/B1sYh
Several users on 4chan’s technology board speculate that Theo is targeted first because he famously resisted an Intel backdoor.
Opposition to CC’s Code of Conduct has generated thousands of posts on 4chan’s technology board alone. These are their arguments:
1. Insertion of the CoC into other projects has heralded witch hunts where good contributors are removed over trivial matters or even events that happened a long time ago–like Larry Garfield, a prominent Drupal contributor who was purged after it was discovered he had a sex fetish where women are submissive.
2. The lack of proper definitions for punishments, time frames, and even what constitutes abuse or harassment leaves the Code of Conduct wide open for abuse (see 1).
3. It gives the people charged with enforcement omnipotent and unaccountable power.
4. It could force acceptance of contributions that wouldn’t make the cut if made by cis white males.
5. CC’s Code of Conduct is purely about power.
6. “‘In all that time I never had to know or care whether my fellow contributors were white, black, male, female, straight, gay, or from the planet Mars, only whether their code was good’; namely, in a project that receives contributions from volunteers who are anonymous beyond a chosen handle, specious claims of exclusion and harassment crumble beneath the most haphazard scrutiny. Contributors reveal as much about their race, sex, and orientation as they want because no one cares about that tangential shit at the end of the day. If there really was some “straight white males only” mentality, the community would insist on determining whether a new contributor is “one of us” before accepting their code, but they don’t do that in the slightest. Thus, it’s patently clear there is no culture of exclusion, but rather a culture of total indifference to individual differences beyond coding ability. The rhetoric of diversity and inclusiveness is just a weapon being used to attack a community that is inherently opposed to identity politics, which is why they’re seen as such a threat to these SJW gestapo.”
On the other side of the aisle, arguments FOR CC’s Code of Conduct include:
1. Fostering an inclusive and safe space for women, LGBTQIA+, and People of Color, who in the absence of the CoC are excluded, harassed, and sometimes even raped by cis white males.
2. Lack of CC’s CoC sustains meritocracy, which “has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology“.
3. The vast majority of Linux contributors are cis white males. CC’s Code of Conduct would enable the building of a more diverse overall demographic as people who aren’t cis white males feel welcome to join and white male harassers are weeded out.
4. Being against the CoC means you want women, LGBTQIA+, and People of Color to be harassed.
Conclusion? Keep an eye on Linux.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2018
Nice, it's finally happening!
Linux are gonna go back into the stone age, and i can finally sell my leftover copies of Windows Server 2000!
Linux are gonna go back into the stone age, and i can finally sell my leftover copies of Windows Server 2000!
R
RP 520
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Can't someone just make backups, call them on their bluff, watch as they delete shit, then post the backups and laugh at them?
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2013
Well, to clarify, it's Linus, but also the culture of sperglords that he inspired. So the whole kernel mailing list.
They drove off Con Kolivas. They also drive off ordinary desktop users reporting issues.
And like you mention, there's also some interplay between corporate influence. Ultimately, if the kernel mailing list drives everyone away except the poor souls who are paid to be there, then the kernel will cater only to big servers or ARM android phones. (Android's probably a closer target, but still not ideal.)
What the fuck am I going to run on my desktop then? A sputtery, hiccupy mess, linux? FreeBSD? Oh wait, the SJWs nuked that. Plus they don't have docker on the BSDs. I use docker on my desktop, and I also use docker on servers. I'd like both usages to be catered to.
I suppose I can't really demand anything from them. But ultimately my point is that the potential to kill a good desktop OS exists both in sperglords like the kernel developers driven by money, as well as much as SJWs driven by ideological bullshit.
Edit: A few more thoughts: Criticism is fine, cursing at people is not; keep your spaghetti in your pockets.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2018
That's not the problem, the problem lies with co-opting, seizing and fragmenting the development process, breaking up the team. This will cause them to take more time fixing bugs, merging kernel drivers and implementing features. It will mean the kernel will either be designed more conservatively or suffer from major bugs due to insufficient resources to test it out.
Why? because the people who actually know their shit have been blackballed and fired from their employer or the devteam themselves because they made an insensitive remark about a troon at one point in their lives.
They've started a witchhunt for wrongthinkers, but hey at least we can look forward to a new codebase without gendered language or master/slave lingo in it!
armoreddinnerjacket
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2018
You don't get it. The SJWs have initiated a witch-hunt within Linux, and the hunted are pulling the nuclear option.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2018
And then be litigated against. Sure.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2017
No because they're threatening to retroactively remove the license they published the code under. Apparently this can fly under GPLv2, which is what the Linux kernel's code is licensed under.
They're doing this because SJWs are threatening to boot them over some new "code of conduct" practices for absurd/irrelevant reasons like race/sex (being FUCKIN WHITE MALES) even though they are valuable contributors to the kernel.
Essentially the screeching dangerhair inverted penis crowd is trying to ruin everything yet again and sane people are exercising what few rights they have over their code to try to prevent it.