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

Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 139 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#121

Post by cesarb »

weliketocode wrote: post #91
cesarb wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me on the other hand, it was obvious that he would be back as soon as 4.19 was released and the 4.20 merge window opened (the kernel release cycle has two phases, the merge window where new features and the bulk of the changes come in, and a phase where only bug fixes are supposed to come in). He took advantage of the time when the merge window was closed, since it's a less hectic period, and handed over maintenan…

That's impressive foresight. Why did Linus make such fanfare about his departure if it was always intended to be so short?

> That's impressive foresight.

Not really, it was on the announcement email from Linus (https://lwn.net/Articles/764901/):

"To tie this all back to the actual 4.19-rc4 release (no, really, this _is_ related!) I actually think that 4.19 is looking fairly good, things have gotten to the "calm" period of the release cycle, and I've talked to Greg to ask him if he'd mind finishing up 4.19 for me, so that I can take a break, and try to at least fix my own behavior."

If Linus asked Greg to "finish 4.19 for him", it's predictable that he'd be back for 4.20.

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#122

Post by sheepmullet »

Marazan wrote: post #99
sheepmullet wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but by being a mediocre straight white male promoted and supported by other mediocre straight white males. That sounds kind of nice actually. If that was actually the case why would the mediocre straight white male feel threatened? Honestly that would be a pretty powerful safety net.

The thing that is threatening to them is having the concept of 'meritocracy' rumbled and exposed as an unclothed emporer for all to see.

Why would that threaten them?

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#123

Post by ensignro2340 »

C1sc0cat wrote: post #79
funkythings wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

She is not wrong the author that coined the phrase in the 50's said basically the same - he did not in any way "meritocracy " was a good thing.

Wow. TIL. Thanks for this comment even though people are downvoting you into oblivion.

Although the concept has existed for centuries, the term "meritocracy" is relatively new. It was used pejoratively by British politician and sociologist Michael Young in his 1958 satirical essay[2][12][13][14][15] The Rise of the Meritocracy, which pictured the United Kingdom under the rule of a government favouring intelligence and aptitude (merit) above all else, ... In this book the term had distinctly negative connotations as Young questioned both the legitimacy of the selection process used to become a member of this elite and the outcomes of being ruled by such a narrowly defined group. The essay, written in the first person by a fictional historical narrator in 2034, interweaves history from the politics of pre- and post-war Britain with those of fictional future events in the short (1960 onward) and long term (2020 onward).[17]

(mine)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy#Etymology

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

(wiki's)

[2] Young, Michael (1958). The rise of the meritocracy, 1870-2033: An essay on education and inequality. London: Thames & Hudson.

[12] Young, Michael (29 June 2001). "Down with meritocracy: The man who coined the word four decades ago wishes Tony Blair would stop using it". The Guardian. London.

[13] Ford, Boris (1992). The Cambridge cultural history of Britain. Cambridge University Press. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-521-42889-7.

[14] Ford, Boris (1992). The Cambridge cultural history of Britain. Cambridge University Press. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-521-42889-7.

[15] Best, Shaun (2005). Understanding Social Divisions. London: Sage. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-7619-4296-2.

[17] Young, Michael (1958). p. 11.

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#124

Post by lj3 »

sheepmullet wrote: post #122
Marazan wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that is threatening to them is having the concept of 'meritocracy' rumbled and exposed as an unclothed emporer for all to see.

Why would that threaten them?

It wouldn't. Meritocracy, on the other hand, certainly threatens the SJW crowd. Being measured by your accomplishments is terrifying to somebody who has no accomplishments and who measures their worth by their identity (race, sex, political affiliation, etc).

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#125

Post by sheepmullet »

lj3 wrote: post #124
sheepmullet wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would that threaten them?

It wouldn't. Meritocracy, on the other hand, certainly threatens the SJW crowd. Being measured by your accomplishments is terrifying to somebody who has no accomplishments and who measures their worth by their identity (race, sex, political affiliation, etc).

> Meritocracy, on the other hand, certainly threatens the SJW crowd.

Yes, I think that’s true - especially in tech. Look at all the amazing open source contributions from people far worse off than even the bottom quartile of Americans.

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#126

Post by dragonwriter »

sheepmullet wrote: post #77
Marazan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's about how many so called meritocracies are not actually meritocracies and instead are nepotistic circle jerks of self reinforcing bad behaviour. That people think it is about enforcing equal outcome shows how threatened they are by the idea that maybe they didn't get where they are by being brilliant but by being a mediocre straight white male promoted and supported by other mediocre straight white males.

> but by being a mediocre straight white male promoted and supported by other mediocre straight white males. That sounds kind of nice actually. If that was actually the case why would the mediocre straight white male feel threatened? Honestly that would be a pretty powerful safety net.

> If that was actually the case why would the mediocre straight white male feel threatened?

Because revealing that gets the majority of people who aren't straight white males united in opposition against it, while the myth of meritocracy, as long as the facade holds up, gets at least some significant share of the losers to buy into the system, which reinforces it's stability to the benefit of the straight white male winners.

> Honestly that would be a pretty powerful safety net.

It is, as long as only the beneficiaries see it, and as long as they don't have any kind of moral compass.

If everyone else sees it (including beneficiaries with a moral compass), they start lighting it on fire, which makes it less effective of a safety net.

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#127

Post by sheepmullet »

dragonwriter wrote: post #126
sheepmullet wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but by being a mediocre straight white male promoted and supported by other mediocre straight white males. That sounds kind of nice actually. If that was actually the case why would the mediocre straight white male feel threatened? Honestly that would be a pretty powerful safety net.

> If that was actually the case why would the mediocre straight white male feel threatened? Because revealing that gets the majority of people who aren't straight white males united in opposition against it, while the myth of meritocracy, as long as the facade holds up, gets at least some significant share of the losers to buy into the system, which reinforces it's stability to the benefit of the straight white male…

> Because revealing that gets the majority of people who aren't straight white males united in opposition against it

Why would that be the case? What would hold all of these very different groups together?

The obvious outcome is a balkanization of the workforce (and maybe broader society).

Why would that scare the mediocre people in the most powerful group?

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#128

Post by danillonunes »

BurnGpuBurn wrote: post #114
AnnoyingSwede wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like SQLite? Well played if you ask me.. https://www.sqlite.org/codeofconduct.html

Thanks for pointing me to that, I wasn't aware. Very well played indeed. I think I'll proactively start including this in my own projects. However what I meant was the projects on this list: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/adopters

I would include that in my project if I had one and I am an atheist. I would convert just so I can play this card.

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#129

Post by BurnGpuBurn »

BurnGpuBurn wrote: post #56
chroma wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s one: https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/874642259672801280 > “Meritocracy” is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy propping up fragile cis het white men’s egos. Or https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1029952846492565504 > “Reverse racism” is such a weird phrase for “justice”. Or https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/823064825366360065 > Why didn’t anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi ai…

It's amazing to see how many nice open source projects have been pressured into adopting this.

And I'm not the only seeing a pattern...

"It's only fair to mention that the person who started the initial controversy by merit of whining about twitter things on the issue tracker is also the owner of the code of conduct that is being pull requested by @tarcieri in #947

One could claim personal bias. In fact, going through past projects that adopted this CoC, this seems to be a recurring trend, where people start a fake controversy, then propose the CoC and guilt trip it into being adopted." [0]

[0] https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/942#issuecomment-1133750...

Re: Linus Torvalds Back in Charge of Linux

#130

Post by roenxi »

rs23296008n1 wrote: post #119
mcbits wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meritocracies fundamentally excuse bad behavior This may often (?) be true in practice if you remove "fundamentally", but not always and it doesn't have to be. In an environment where people work together to produce an outcome, the ability to interact positively and productively with others is a valuable behavioral merit. It keeps one talented asshole from chasing away all the other talent. You can have a meritocra…

I'd go further than just remove "fundamentally" from that statement. I'd say the entire statement is false. Getting rid of meritocracy is "Everyone gets an A+". Teams will quickly get in trouble if everyone got A+ for "works well with the team" but some should've gotten a D- or an F. Meritocracies don't have to excuse bad behaviour if they simply penalise it. Perhaps those stuck in bad situations and complaining abou…

Meritocracy means that a political system is organised so that the "meritorious" get power, where merit is based on performance.

You are talking about getting rid of ranking, possibly the concept of merit. It isn't possible to have a meritocracy with no concept of merit, but that is much stronger than not being a meritocracy.

For example, I could rank a team of 5 from A+ to F, then put cousin Ahmed in charge because he is a relation of mine. That would be a system that is not a meritocracy, because to be in charge a person would have to be related to me, but there is still a concept of merit. I would expect my cousin to then consider merit carefully as he divides up tasks.

Post reply on HN