Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abuse is indefensible

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 221 posts

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#171

Post by marrs »

tptacek wrote: post #157
marrs wrote: post #118

As I understand it, the Linux codebase has hundreds of regular contributors and Torvalds basically spends his entire time reviewing patches to an operating system kernel that is used in countless mission-critical scenarios across the world. The implications of introducing a bug or security exploit to an OS kernel could be as severe as loss of life. With that in mind, I find myself wondering every time I read a report…

"Such an error"? What error?

I don't know, I'm not a kernel developer. Whatever error Linus was trying to avoid.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#172

Post by anonbanker »

enneff wrote: post #73
eis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same feeling about the last bit of the article. Drama for no reason. I would be glad if the tech community focused more on tech than on shitstorms. Some people are just too sensitive. If you don't like how Linus behaves, then don't deal with him. Noone forces you. But why post an article on your blog which is associated with Mozilla including a gist of collected swear words? At least Linus didn't engage in…

> If you don't like how Linus behaves, then don't deal with him. Noone forces you. Linus' status in the Open Source community makes him a role model for some people (whether he likes it or not; I suspect he doesn't), and so people imitate him. It's much less palatable coming from someone with less credibility and experience.

if the alternative is SJW's watering down the discourse, I'll take thirty more Linuses, thanks.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#173

Post by eis »

enneff wrote: post #73
eis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same feeling about the last bit of the article. Drama for no reason. I would be glad if the tech community focused more on tech than on shitstorms. Some people are just too sensitive. If you don't like how Linus behaves, then don't deal with him. Noone forces you. But why post an article on your blog which is associated with Mozilla including a gist of collected swear words? At least Linus didn't engage in…

> If you don't like how Linus behaves, then don't deal with him. Noone forces you. Linus' status in the Open Source community makes him a role model for some people (whether he likes it or not; I suspect he doesn't), and so people imitate him. It's much less palatable coming from someone with less credibility and experience.

That's another problem. Maybe adult people shouldn't have role models that they blindly copy in every way.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#174

Post by anonbanker »

david-given wrote: post #43
nabla9 wrote: post #6

I thought that finally I can see example of Linus being abusive. This was not it. Linus was attacking the work and ideas and cursing them. He was not attacking the person who wrote the code. Cursing is not abusive by itself. Cursing is emotional emphasis. I would not want to work in a environment where strong emotional language used to criticize your work is considered abusive. If conflict over ideas and work does no…

I would not want to work in an environment where strong emotional language used to criticize your work is not considered abusive. It's childish and counterproductive. I'm not your enemy, I'm your ally --- making me hate you isn't going to make me want to work with you. If I'm wrong, say so, but do it politely. I work with someone who has an amazing ability to tell people they're wrong and make them feel good about th…

And we can see your net contributions to the kernel source tree as an example of the environment you choose to work in.

but thank you for telling us your opinion anyway.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#175

Post by [deleted] »

x1024 wrote: post #84
tptacek wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Can you explain how this particular code is "safe" or "unsafe"? Again: I'm curious as to how much of what Linus says is taken at face value on HN. I'm even more interested now, because the fulcrum of Linus's argument isn't safety.

You are committing a logical fallacy. I'm not "the voice of HN", nor am I a representative sample of "what HN thinks". This is just my opinion. Using a builtin operation ("addition and comparison of integers") is always safer than using a function that may or may not work the same everywhere. I.e. a nonstandard function. Also, the proposed code has more levels of indirection, therefore places a higher cognitive load…

[deleted]

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#176

Post by anonbanker »

pervycreeper wrote: post #68

I am troubled by this obsession that these activists have with Torvalds. Could there be anything more minor than these complaints about tone? What harm does the existence of one software project which permits 'rants' do to others? Do those who claim to desire civility not understand that by hounding and inundating him and the community in general with the same talking points ad infinitum, they are themselves being un…

Corporations do not like Linus. they like the work he did, but if they could replace him with, say, Greg Kroah-Hartman, or Ted T'so, they would do so in a heartbeat. Until then, they can preach the narrative that Linus is hurting linux because he rants.

Once he retires or dies, they'll say "thank goodness he's gone!", and you'll see the kernel code quality (and security) take a nosedive.

So now you see why the social justice warriors are getting so much press: their opinions align with the interests of people wishing to taint the linux kernel.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#177

Post by Tomte »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #19

Why is it that people who support Linus' tirades and mention freedom of speech, etc get so incredibly hurt when others exercise their own freedom of speech and point out how abusive they are?

You can lift that argument to the next level: Why do you get hurt about someone exercising his right to speak when he criticizes that you're exercising your right to speak to criticize someone who exercises his right to speak?

And then to the next level. And the next. Ad infinitum.

It's totally unproductive.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#179

Post by dillera »

anonbanker wrote: post #174
david-given wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not want to work in an environment where strong emotional language used to criticize your work is not considered abusive. It's childish and counterproductive. I'm not your enemy, I'm your ally --- making me hate you isn't going to make me want to work with you. If I'm wrong, say so, but do it politely. I work with someone who has an amazing ability to tell people they're wrong and make them feel good about th…

And we can see your net contributions to the kernel source tree as an example of the environment you choose to work in. but thank you for telling us your opinion anyway.

this

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#180

Post by msbarnett »

_ea1k wrote: post #79

"Nonetheless, I’ve seen multiple people defending and even celebrating it. (One outlet called it an “epic rant”.) " I don't think calling it an "epic rant" was celebrating it. http://www.itworld.com/article/3000564/linux/linus-goes-on-e... "Linus loses it in an epic rant about kernel code." isn't exactly a complimentary line, IMO.

I read the adjective "epic" as flattering/celebrating. In use its somewhat similar to "awesome" in North American English.

I'm not clear if the author is from the UK or something, though.

Post reply on HN