Live data from Hacker News

Linus on "acting professionally"

marc.info

491–500 of 505 posts

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#491
post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he wasn't communicating through emails, it probably would have been considered as going too far already. And he probably doesn't rant the same way when talking face-to-face with others, or when dealing with people outside of the tech/Linux community.

Not so sure. Didn't he tell an entire company to go fuck themselves and throw them the middle finger on public video? And as a bonus, I think it resulted in a positive outcome. http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/06/nvidia-addresses-linus-torv...

You just proved my point. He wasn't talking face to face with an Nvidia engineer and told him "hey, you suck, fuck you!". He acts like this behind email and a video camera. Maybe he can behave the same way face to face in his very civilized Finland, I don't know. Where I'm from, he would probably get beat-up.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part of his behaviour in this email is unacceptable in particular? Let’s look at it: > Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP! Okay, so he tells Mauro to stop talking because he apparently thinks that what Mauro was saying is wrong. To make very sure that what he wrote is read, he puts in fancy caps and some light swearing, which, however, is not directed at anyone in particular. A more polite version of this would have been…

You make it sound as if it was a perfectly normal tone to use... Do you talk like that to, say, your parents?

Talking to parents and talking to someone over email are totally different things. In email, you need a way to express emotion and this is Linus' way

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#493

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…

Yeah, I personally don't really agree that name-calling and dressing people down publicly is really the most effective method of altering a team's behaviour for the greater good of a project. I guess I'm just thinking about the vast array of conflicting opinions and ideas around the world and how they might mesh together to form some kind of cohesive whole, in general.

So, like, I don't agree that the name-calling is effective. But, maybe, Linus does. Can we still work together even though we might be screaming at each other? Can we still make progress? If we can do that (without debilitating each other) I think that could be seen as a good thing.

Linus' point is that there is no universal definition of "professional" and there never will be. There's just a bunch of different humans walking around on this rock floating in space, each with their own minds and ideas about what's right and what makes the most sense (sometimes similar, often times different). With billions of us out there, it's probably impossible for us to all be on the same page at all times. But maybe we can be on the same page, for some things, some of the time and tolerate the other things where we're not on the same page in the interest of progress (however you want to define "progress"). I think that's more realistic, and I think that's all we can ever hope for. There are no "rails" when it comes to human behaviour, imho.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#494
post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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.

That may be your rule, but it is definitely not the norm. I've known countless people, including the infamous Erik Naggum, that are far more abrasive via email than they are in person. Erik was, in person, a sweet and thoughtful person that would never attack someone. On email or usenet, he was on the order of Linus at attacking people. So, while it's your good rule of thumb, my observation over the years is it is no…

I saw lots of email from Erik whose viciousness went far above and beyond anything I've ever seen from Linus. And Erik was extremely unsuccessful at organizing collaborative efforts; Lisp languished for over a decade under his dominance. I don't think it's a coincidence that Erik's retiring from comp.lang.lisp was roughly concurrent with the revival of the Lisp family of languages.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#495
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a false dichotomy. it's possible to be succint, harsh, and directly to the point without swearing or being abusive. for example, off the top of my head: "stephen, this code is riddled with basic errors and is completely unacceptable. please fix a, b, and c immediately and know that if you make mistakes like this again, your contributions will no longer be welcome." versus: "stephen, WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WIT…

In my experience, the closer you are to action the more swearing (sales, press, front-line dev) and the polite stuff is more for the office bureaucrats who aren't critical to the success of the organization. There's something refreshingly blunt and urgent about the 2nd case. (Edit: My experience includes Fortune 100 in consumer tech and finance)

I totally agree. The second response came from a person who is pissed off. The first response came from an emotionless hollow corporate robot.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#496
post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I started behaving more carefully around him, and a little more carefully in general. This, I believe, is the wrong way to go about it. To me this seems like some sort of culture clash and in my opinion staying silent is the wrong way to go about this. If I notice someone getting offended by my profanity I just tell them that they were not the target of that profanity and that I have no 'beef' with them. I…

> To me this seems like some sort of culture clash and in my opinion staying silent is the wrong way to go about this. I'm perfectly capable of expressing everything I might express with profanity, without profanity. I'm now conscious of the fact that I'm a lot more persuasive if I take half a second to edit myself. The whole thing was a valuable learning experience. > I think 'catcalling' is very nuanced Interesting…

I'm perfectly capable of expressing everything I might express with profanity, without profanity. I'm now conscious of the fact that I'm a lot more persuasive if I take half a second to edit myself. The whole thing was a valuable learning experience.

Of course, from a social engineering standpoint that makes complete sense. But the point is that around my peers I don't need to edit myself; I do when I have to (I for instance swear a bit less in the presence of my boss), but I always take it with a grain of salt. I don't want to edit myself, I like being free in that sense and think that freedom of speech is something that first and foremost starts with yourself.

Interesting. I'd only ever use the word to describe the kind of rude behavior that happens between strangers on the street.

Might be, I'm not a native speaker so what I'm thinking about might still fit under the label of flirting, but I can't really say that I know the terminology 'normal' people use to talk about social interaction.

I bet this never, ever happens.

I think it's pretty unlikely, but possible. The point was that while (at least from my perspective) anti-discrimination rules don't do anything to enable a safe environment for minorities there is the potential for abuse. In my eyes those rules are snake oil, I think the TSA might be a somewhat fitting analogy if you think about their efficiency.

That seems well-intentioned but entirely utopian to me.

Of course it is, but that's not reason not to use it as a guideline and strive for its implementation. If you don't try, you'll never get there. You can probably already find multiple examples of me violating this guideline in this thread, but that doesn't stop me from at least trying to make the way I communicate better. :)

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#497
post #494
post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be your rule, but it is definitely not the norm. I've known countless people, including the infamous Erik Naggum, that are far more abrasive via email than they are in person. Erik was, in person, a sweet and thoughtful person that would never attack someone. On email or usenet, he was on the order of Linus at attacking people. So, while it's your good rule of thumb, my observation over the years is it is no…

I saw lots of email from Erik whose viciousness went far above and beyond anything I've ever seen from Linus. And Erik was extremely unsuccessful at organizing collaborative efforts; Lisp languished for over a decade under his dominance. I don't think it's a coincidence that Erik's retiring from comp.lang.lisp was roughly concurrent with the revival of the Lisp family of languages.

First, Erik wasn't Lisp. He didn't even work for a Lisp company, except for consulting for Franz briefly. Second, your cause and effect meter is way off. The resurgence of Lisp happened because there were a LOT of people out of work in 2001 and many of them started working on CMUCL and SBCL.

Erik's influence ended outside of comp.lang.lisp and the influence of that usenet group was fairly small, in the greater scheme of things.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#498
post #497
post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw lots of email from Erik whose viciousness went far above and beyond anything I've ever seen from Linus. And Erik was extremely unsuccessful at organizing collaborative efforts; Lisp languished for over a decade under his dominance. I don't think it's a coincidence that Erik's retiring from comp.lang.lisp was roughly concurrent with the revival of the Lisp family of languages.

First, Erik wasn't Lisp. He didn't even work for a Lisp company, except for consulting for Franz briefly. Second, your cause and effect meter is way off. The resurgence of Lisp happened because there were a LOT of people out of work in 2001 and many of them started working on CMUCL and SBCL. Erik's influence ended outside of comp.lang.lisp and the influence of that usenet group was fairly small, in the greater scheme…

Lisp didn't resurge because SBCL started being developed again. SBCL, although I like it, is still relatively little used, in the overall scheme of things, a scheme which includes Clojure, elisp, Racket, Clisp, Chicken, TinyScheme, Guile, Arc, MCL, and so on. Lisp resurged because new hackers started using Lisp again, maybe in part because of pg, but I think in large part because they didn't get driven away by Erik. Lisp companies are comparatively irrelevant.

comp.lang.lisp was very important prior to the founding of Stack Overflow, EmacsWiki, and so on. It was a lot more important to Lisp than any Lisp company, and maybe more important than all Lisp companies put together.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#499
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was low, I don't agree with him, but seriously that ad hominem was disgusting and out of place. I am now poorer for the time wasted replying to your post.

O right - my reply is disgusting ad hominem and out of place, but suggesting that you call your wife "ludicrously stupid" and "extremely dumb" is not? Edit: Just saw your reply to the OP: "If she is dimwitted to a point that she doesn't understand even when it's explained, I'd try to find a new wife." Words fail me.

I don't know. I can't stand to be with someone that isn't on par with me when it comes to intellect/emotions (and that is not that difficult to achieve). To commit to such a serious relationship with someone that doesn't and can't understand my position seems almost impossible for me.

Also the wife in question is a theoretical construct, not an actual human being, that was for purpose of mental experiment made 'extremely dumb'. He isn't saying his or any other wife/parter was dumb, he made a thought experiment to demonstrate his point. Try to not be so obtuse.

Re: Linus on "acting professionally"

#500
post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're offended by the word douche to describe a jerk, then we occupy different cultures. Similarly, if someone thinks being called a "jerk" is an insult devoid of constructive criticism, then they're likely either intentionally obdurate or they lack the self-awareness to identify their failings. I'm perfectly aware of my ability to be a douche. I just choose who to be a jerk to. Strangers on the internet: possibl…

I'm not offended by it in the slightest. I swear like a trooper. My issue is that you're trying to pass off a generic insult as 'constructive criticism'. What is insulting is that you think I'm stupid enough to believe it - it's not the words you're using, but the underlying context. It's either that, or you don't actually understand what constructive criticism is.

I'm probably stupid for starting this up again, but at the top of the thread, in my first comment, before I call Linus a douche, I spend two paragraphs describing what I think the problem is.

If Linus actually read my HN comment and (a) was offended and (b) wanted constructive criticism, he would see that I believe he is poorly socialized for working in a certain (rather popular) type of work environment. That seems to me pretty constructive. Linus would not be suited for a job in diplomacy, or any other type of relationship-intensive enterprise.

Now, if I just said "Linus is a douche," I'd give you your point.

I already regret starting this up again, because you seem to be committed to your point. But WTF, I had 10 minutes to kill before I pick up my kid.

Post reply on HN