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

Linus on "acting professionally"

marc.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 505 posts

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#451

Post by 6d0debc071 »

riggins wrote: post #327
columbo wrote: post #200

This is another great example of why you can't take successful people and distil them down to their base components and say "ah, this is what made him great!" I believe being a loud-abrasive-dictator works for Linus because he is famous for being a loud-abrasive-dictator. That's not important. What is important is the reader. Let's be clear on a few things #1 - Linus doesn't run a business. He's the kernel admin, he'…

I love what Linus is saying here. I feel like some people haven't really internalized the lesson of the schoolyard saying 'sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me'. I think that saying is deeper than it seems at first blush. It's a reminder that we are 100% in control of how we react to words. We choose how we react to words. You can always choose. Anyone who complains about language is imp…

The counterpoint of believing that the pen is mightier than the sword is the fact that, while sticks and stones may break my bones, words sent thousands to the death camps.

If you choose not to react to language then I can make you look weak or evil or whatever in front of those who do, and by the time I decide to make things physical you'll have no-one ready to help you. That's the lesson of the school yard.

The lesson of the world beyond the school yard, as above, is even more brutal.

Edit: Point being that being verbally attacked scares and upsets me/many others, and it seems to me that's a perfectly reasonable response to have.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#452

Post by D9u »

pmelendez wrote: post #316
DigitalJack wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main difference is everybody is remote. I don't doubt Linus would be less brutal in person.

> "I don't doubt Linus would be less brutal in person." My personal rule of thumb is do not say something written that I wouldn't say in person, especially if I am using a profanity language.

     My personal rule of thumb is do not say something written that I wouldn't say in person, especially if I am using a profanity language.
Obviously not Linus' rule... Anyone who's ever followed the kernel dev mailing list knows this.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#453

Post by Tuna-Fish »

KaeseEs wrote: post #330
robmclarty wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the really great point Linus is making: that we (as humans) can find a way to work together on a common goal despite our differences. Linus obviously has some differences, and yet is managing to pull off this amazing project that affects so many of us. Forget business and software development, the world needs to learn how to work this way, because there's no way the entire world will ever "be p…

"Being professional" is not about all agreeing to the same ideology, but consistent standards of behavior are the core of professionalism. If we cannot agree that screaming "SHUT THE FUCK UP!" and calling people brain-damaged and "worthless piece[s] of shit" (as Linus has done elsewhere; the specific example in the OP isn't as bad) is inconsonant with professionalism, the concept has lost all meaning. There are ways…

> Linus isn't a drill sergeant

That's right, he's actually a lieutenant in reserve of the FDF.

He got his start of leading men by training a bunch of recruits for FDF, and his leadership style "management by Perkele" very closely matches the one found all over in Finland among other reserve leaders (Finland maintains conscription, and officer training is considered a very good experience for leadership roles even outside the military). Not an imitation.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#454

Post by MaxScheiber »

claudius wrote: post #237
doctorfoo wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hacker News: Where IQ and intelligence trumps being pleasant. So many tech types are assholes.

You'd not take intelligence over ‘being pleasant’? I tend to enjoy the company of an intelligent asshole more than that of a ‘pleasant’ idiot any day.

I much prefer to hang out with my very kind-hearted and pleasant (yet slightly less intelligent[1]) fraternity brothers over some of my extremely bright computer science classmates who don't have as much social tact. That's because most conversations with the latter group turn into pissing matches over intellectualism, programming skill, and the like. That's not to say that I don't get along with these kids; they're great to study with, and I learn a lot from them. However, it just gets grating when we're in algorithms class discussing selection sort versus merge sort and some smart aleck asks why we can't just use radix sort because it's asymptotically linear and blah blah blah we get that you're smart, stop gloating in lecture.[2]

[1] Of course, that's not to say that my brothers are unintelligent (they're very bright). However, one of the most important life skills I learned in public school was learning how to get along with those "pleasant idiots," as you put it.

[2] And I'm not disagreeing that kernel dev requires a more authoritative leadership style than most pursuits, but it seemed that this conversation had dropped into speaking in generalities about life.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#455

Post by officemonkey »

vacri wrote: post #304
officemonkey wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling someone a douche is constructive criticism. If I call you a douche, it means you're acting in self-centered, antagonistic manner that aggravating the relationship. Of course some people don't care about that. People don't fix things they don't feel are broken.

Rubbish. Constructive criticism requires input on specific paths to improve the situation. Telling someone they're a douche is just applying a generic insult. It's not even criticism of any kind, as douche is nonspecific.

>Rubbish.

You're acting in self-centered, antagonistic manner that is aggravating the relationship.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#456

Post by podperson »

wozniacki wrote: post #312
podperson wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe he's just so talented that he can carry a huge interpersonal handicap. Actually, this email is pretty polite and to-the-point. I don't know exactly what it is that he said that was offensive in private, but he's actually being pretty reasonable here. The thing is, some people spend a lot of effort when writing to check that they don't accidentally leave "sharp edges" in their writing (and then they still fai…

There's a ton of research on how written communications (especially with relative anonymity, etc.) can lead to cascading flamewars and so forth without anyone setting out to troll or be outrageous. Genuinely interested in this research. Care to cite?

I'm not an academic so I can't reel off citations from memory (my wife can but I don't have her handy).

Here's a quick example thanks to google:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/02/70179

But this is a drop in the bucket.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#457

Post by kyberias »

All I can say is, people should read the whole thread. I don't think the examples presented by Sarah are all that good. Yes, Linus uses strong words but they are not really ad hominem. He doesn't hate the people who made the errors, but he is angry since they "should have known better". He has a great point about email communication: that one really has to be more honest and open about feelings. And that obviously includes feelings of anger and frustration.

Start from here:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137391145411685&w=2

Update: bad -> good.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#458

Post by justin66 »

phryk wrote: post #413
justin66 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Diversity is to be cherished, not frowned upon. It makes for a more interesting world, and I am not willing to lose that just to make my environment have a few less sharp edges. If the effect of not censoring yourself in this regard is to work in a much less diverse environment, which side is going to give? Honest question.

If the effect of not censoring yourself in this regard is to work in a much less diverse environment, which side is going to give? Honest question. And a good one, too. The honest answer is: I don't know. I think this is highly contextual. At least I can't make a generalized decision for that. If the "less diversity" bit for instance means incorporating a 'No Nazis'-rule then the choice might be clear while in other…

> If, however, we are still talking about the case of censoring out profanity, you know my opinion. The people who are filtered out (or constitute the "less diversity") are the sort of people who get offended by me making use of a basic freedom (the one of speech). I am not interested in meeting people like that - frankly I hope they stay as far away from me as fucking possible.

This is interesting. My instinctive reaction to someone trying to censor me is pretty damn negative, and I can swear like a sailor. On the other hand, what you wrote reminded me of a super sweet, gentle guy that I worked with once who was just genuinely freaked out by my profane manner. From a different country, deeply religious, etc. etc. I found out from a third party that the guy was weirded out by the way some of us carried ourselves, since the guy was a gentleman and wouldn't/couldn't say anything.

Of course I started behaving more carefully around him, and a little more carefully in general. He was always nice to me and a very, very skilled worker, someone I respected, so it would have seemed churlish to me to do otherwise.

> If you don't want to get hit on there's a plethora of ways to communicate that in a non-verbal fashion, like wearing a wedding ring or - less subtle - wearing a shirt that says "I don't want to get hit on" or something, you get the idea…

I believe the onus is entirely on the guy who is trying to be charming (if that's what we're talking about, as opposed to simple catcalling sorts of harassment) to notice when the object of his wit does not reciprocate with a smile and a kind word and to move the fuck on before his behavior gets creepy. I suppose I'm agreeing with you, as not smiling is a pretty clear form of communication - no rings or shirts or pepper spray are required.

I'm not sure what we should do with the guys who aren't clever enough to pick up on such signals but I'm open to a Soylent Green sort of option. (attending the average hacker event seems like a punishment all its own to me, so I'm useless for envisioning rules for something like that. Punish them by making them attend more hacker events?)

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#460

Post by kyberias »

kyberias wrote: post #457

All I can say is, people should read the whole thread. I don't think the examples presented by Sarah are all that good. Yes, Linus uses strong words but they are not really ad hominem. He doesn't hate the people who made the errors, but he is angry since they "should have known better". He has a great point about email communication: that one really has to be more honest and open about feelings. And that obviously in…

This is the gem: "Sarah, I don't have Tourettes syndrome." :D
Post reply on HN