Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10 • Hacker News Board

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#131

Post by tutfbhuf » Fri, Jan 08, 2021, 1:13 PM UTC

corbet wrote: post #102

lrossi wrote: post #8

Original post: https://lwn.net/Articles/839772/ Lines of code are not a good metric for the importance of the contributions. You can see that the top developer actually made a single 26k loc commit that just removed a driver.

I would love to find better metrics than changesets and lines of codes — I agree that both are awful ways of measuring actual software-development work. I have yet to find something better, though; suggestions welcome.

I think the best metric is to sort by number of comments on a particular changeset. More comments, more wide spread discussion, more people involved => more impact.

WireGuard for example is only a relatively small changeset, but has an huge impact for many uses, you can find many comments, posts, write ups, about it all over the internet. Many knew that this feature was going to be huge, well before merge into linux.

On the other hand, if almost no one is discussing a particular change (e.g. the removal of 20k lines of driver code), then the impact will either be very low and unimportant or it will unexpectedly become important, but there was no way you could have known it beforehand.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#132

Post by unityByFreedom » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

Geminidog wrote: post #129

marcus_holmes wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, my response is based on the science. The cold hard truth is that there isn't a single study identifying any kind of racial component to IQ (and please supply one if you know different). The reason it's a white supremecist dog whistle is that any theory that suggests that character has anything to do with race allows racists to say that "they are like this, therefore we must treat them like this". Also, nazism - t…

> No, my response is based on the science. Then cite your science. Don't give me some one sentence response with no evidence. >The cold hard truth is that there isn't a single study identifying any kind of racial component to IQ (and please supply one if you know different). I literally stated that the cold hard truth makes this controversial not definitive. There is no single study that race as a causative factor fo…

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent anyway.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#133

Post by unityByFreedom » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #60

marcus_holmes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suggesting that human intelligence varies by race is a very old, very debunked idea that no-one believes any more outside of some small racist cliques.

I don't read the comment as suggesting that Chinese people are genetically smart - just that they are smart. That IQ varies by race or ethnicity is an established fact, not a debunked theory. The controversial question is why it varies - nature or the environment?

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent. It certainly isn't settled science that some ethnicities are more intelligent on average than others. That is some James Damore BS that can never be measured. And by the way, we are one human race, according to the scientific definition.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#134

Post by dash2 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 8:15 PM UTC

unityByFreedom wrote: post #133

dash2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't read the comment as suggesting that Chinese people are genetically smart - just that they are smart. That IQ varies by race or ethnicity is an established fact, not a debunked theory. The controversial question is why it varies - nature or the environment?

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent. It certainly isn't settled science that some ethnicities are more intelligent on average than others. That is some James Damore BS that can never be measured. And by the way, we are one human race, according to the scientific definition.

You are only right to the extent that IQ is indeed a "subjective measure". For example, there are IQ differences between black and white people in the US. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achievement_gaps_in_the_United.... Debates about this take the form (a) of arguing about what IQ measures, and whether it is valid; (b) of arguing about whether environmental or genetic factors contribute to the differences - for instance, if you have worse nutrition, experience more air pollution, or have a less stimulating home environment, all of these might cause your IQ to be lower than someone else. However, there is no serious debate that the gaps in IQ tests (and many other achievement measures) exist.

The debate about whether IQ is "subjective" is ongoing but some things are pretty clearly known. For instance, IQ is highly predictive of many life outcomes, and many different kinds of academic tests all load on a single factor (general intelligence).

This has all been debated up and down the hillsides, and although I don't think IQ is the single measure that defines everything (obviously?), you are premature to dismiss IQ as "subjective". That's far from obvious.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#135

Post by unityByFreedom » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 11:26 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #134

unityByFreedom wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent. It certainly isn't settled science that some ethnicities are more intelligent on average than others. That is some James Damore BS that can never be measured. And by the way, we are one human race, according to the scientific definition.

You are only right to the extent that IQ is indeed a "subjective measure". For example, there are IQ differences between black and white people in the US. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achievement_gaps_in_the_United... . Debates about this take the form (a) of arguing about what IQ measures, and whether it is valid; (b) of arguing about whether environmental or genetic factors contribute to the differences -…

Your thesis and supportive arguments contradict your conclusion.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#136

Post by Geminidog » Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 7:37 PM UTC

unityByFreedom wrote: post #132

Geminidog wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, my response is based on the science. Then cite your science. Don't give me some one sentence response with no evidence. >The cold hard truth is that there isn't a single study identifying any kind of racial component to IQ (and please supply one if you know different). I literally stated that the cold hard truth makes this controversial not definitive. There is no single study that race as a causative factor fo…

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent anyway.

IQ is not subjective. The word intelligence is subjective. You can't say something like Asians in general are more intelligent then white people but you can say Asians in general have higher IQ.

So a better way to talk about this topic is to ignore the word "intelligence" all together. Just talk about how and why Asians have higher IQ.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#137

Post by jpetso » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 12:32 AM UTC

danbolt wrote: post #62

zm262 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taiwan is not a country in China's eyes. Technically Taiwan is really not a country but works like one since 1949. If you follow Winnie the Poh closely enough, he has claimed "Taiwan problem will not be passed onto next generation". My personal estimate is that Taiwan will be taken by force within 20 years.

Do you feel it'd be an amphibious invasion would be a bit of a pyrrhic victory within 20 years? I feel like the PRC would be unpopular with the citizens of Taiwan and not look good internationally. My impression is that the PRC was sabre-rattling to rally the public.

PRC appears to be unpopular with significant numbers of Hong Kong residents and it most definitely didn't look good internationally. That doesn't necessarily stop them from taking power.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#138

Post by unityByFreedom » Tue, Jan 12, 2021, 3:00 AM UTC

Geminidog wrote: post #136

unityByFreedom wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nature vs nurture is an ancient argument. Science indicates both contribute, and IQ is a subjective measure of what's perceived as intelligent anyway.

IQ is not subjective. The word intelligence is subjective. You can't say something like Asians in general are more intelligent then white people but you can say Asians in general have higher IQ. So a better way to talk about this topic is to ignore the word "intelligence" all together. Just talk about how and why Asians have higher IQ.

I said the idea that IQ measures intelligence is subjective.

Re: Huawei Tops Intel as Top Linux Kernel Contributor for 5.10

#139

Post by Geminidog » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

unityByFreedom wrote: post #138

Geminidog wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IQ is not subjective. The word intelligence is subjective. You can't say something like Asians in general are more intelligent then white people but you can say Asians in general have higher IQ. So a better way to talk about this topic is to ignore the word "intelligence" all together. Just talk about how and why Asians have higher IQ.

I said the idea that IQ measures intelligence is subjective.

That's only because the word "intelligence" is subjective and ill defined. The problem is our usage of the word intelligence as a primary entity. Instead iq should be the primary benchmark for mental performance and intelligence is just one subjective aspect of it.