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

"Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 487 posts

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#301

Post by tbrownaw »

bhouston wrote: post #107

I'll probably get burned for saying this but I think this is related to GamerGate/SocialJusticeWarriors. I think that other controversy is being portrayed as anti-feminist (and there is a lot of undertones of that) but I think that it is more indicative of a general problem -- it is basically unrestrained incivility against those whom one has disagreements, or who has done perceived wrongs. For some reason it has bec…

On the one hand, this is an excellent post. On the other hand, leading off with "I'll probably get burned for saying this" makes me want to downvote it on general principle.

I don't like being confused this way. :(

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#302

Post by tomp »

pyre wrote: post #287
tomp wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither.

Could you expand on the "all bullshit" part then because it comes across as saying that there isn't any point to being civil with people.

No. You seem to deliberately want to misunderstand me. Many != all.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#303

Post by vidoc »

chris_wot wrote: post #9
freehunter wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a real shame because it's really true and really needs to be addressed. We've had these conversations about gamers, about startups, about tech in general, but when it comes to Linux (and related open source projects) it's somehow impossible to talk about. The community just isn't friendly and isn't inclusive, and that bad behavior goes far enough as to shut down any talk of the bad behavior.

I don't know about anyone else, but when I read Linus write: "Of course, I'd also suggest that whoever was the genius who thought it was a good idea to read things ONE F✦CKING BYTE AT A TIME with system calls for each byte should be retroactively aborted. Who the f*ck does idiotic things like that? How did they noty die as babies, considering that they were likely too stupid to find a tit to suck on?" https://lkml.or…

I'm wondering what kind of world you would like instead? Would you like those mailing lists to be an environment similar to what you have in the mass media, where political correctness and hypocrisy is rampant, and anytime someone crosses the boundary we use words like 'hate'?

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#304

Post by issa »

I think people might be overthinking the problem here. Whenever someone is really good at one thing (say, programming), it is easy for them to get away with being really bad at others (say, manners).

It's the same reason college athletes get away with breaking so many rules.

And both situations are very hard to solve due to the competing and conflicting interests involved.

On a personal level, we should all try our best to stop people (ourselves included) from being programmer bullies. And I've seen many people work very hard to do so!

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#305

Post by yummyfajitas »

pyre wrote: post #288
yummyfajitas wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with your summary. Physical weakness in my comparison is analogous to lack of technical skill or incorrectness in tech. It's orthogonal to being thick or thin skinned - one can be an uber powerlifter with a total > 1000lb who gets offended and whines when a coach says "your abs aren't strong enough, work them harder". I also don't believe it's wrong to want anything. I merely believe that all the potent…

I can understand that. On the same token, I see a lot of people that seem to celebrate "bluntness" as if it is 'proof' of something (e.g. skill, 'lack of bullshit', etc). I don't think that this is right, or an opinion that should be encouraged.

Bluntness is exactly that - a costly signal of competence.

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/12/more-signaling.html

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/01/excess_signalin.html

I wish I could find his article on incompetence as a costly signal of criminal commitment.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#306

Post by Mikeb85 »

krober wrote: post #234
Mikeb85 wrote: post #63

Open source is not awful. It's perhaps the most important thing to happen to computing, ever. Multi-billion dollar companies have formed largely around open source. It enables millions of people to do business. Learning how to code is easier than ever. Saying open source is awful because you've encountered assholes is like saying free market economies are awful because some vendor overcharged you one time, or saying…

He's not saying open source is categorically awful, but that there are awful things about it. Pointing out these deficiencies is a way to foster communication to fix shortcomings that may exist in the community. You're right, FOSS has allowed a great many things to happen, but that doesn't mean FOSS and its methods are perfect. Continually revisiting and refining processes should be at the forefront of FOSS.

People can be awful. FOSS is produced by people. When people get together, they argue.

Maybe he should say people who interact online can be awful.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#307

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

kyberias wrote: post #209
kenjackson wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most people the difference between being a complete jerk and a normal guy is simply what they say. Would you tolerate a manager who talked to you this way? I wouldn't. Not even Linus. And then I'd point out all the pretty crappy code Linus had checked in.

Then you'd point out all the pretty crappy code Linus had checked in? That would be your, what, revenge? And a way of showing how not to be a jerk? I don't think Linus would care. Everyone makes mistakes. Linus is a gatekeeper of sorts and he has to "point out crappy code" whether people like his language or not. The outside world just needs to decide how seriously they take these outbursts. I don't think there's any…

There are certainly evil outcomes when potential contributors actively avoid the Linux kernel and/or other open source projects because the culture can be so hostile.

It's a double loss. It makes the code weaker and less innovative, and it makes the culture seem unappealing to outsiders.

You might not think that's significant. But how can you know what you're missing by not being more exclusive?

Consider: open source could be set up on a semi-formal apprentice/mentor basis. It could easily become a way for programmers at all levels to develop professional standing.

Code on a GitHub profile is not the same as being able to say "I worked on X and was mentored by Y and Z."

And "You're a moron, fuck off" is maybe not the best way to create a culture of collaborative support.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#308

Post by Diederich »

Kalium wrote: post #295
Diederich wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of the fact that this wasn't his first 'offense'. Nonetheless, my question still stands: how is a verbally abusive diatribe in any way better than a shorter, more reasoned, and perhaps final response?

It makes the reader aware of the writer's true position on the matter, adding emphasis and clarity to the situation. It strengthens the impact. It could have been "This code is bad. I will not accept this code.". Except that would not have communicated the same message. It's not always desirable to strip away emotional content.

I agree with that.

"It upsets and angers me that you're continuing to make the same mistakes over and over again."

vs. 'abortion', etc.

Both examples communicate emotional content. Only one of them is verbal abuse.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#309

Post by Someone1234 »

crististm wrote: post #274
aidenn0 wrote: post #259

Lennart specifically called out Gentoo; as a Gentoo user, I do want to speak up in defense of the Gentoo community. I will concede the point that Lennart has, by far, probably received more vitriol per-capita from the Gentoo community than any others. I'm not going to defend any of the personal attacks launched on him. However, Lennart writes very opinionated software, and the opinions it takes are more at clash with…

Indeed. About ten years ago, there was a saying on Gentoo site saying that it is a bug if you can't customize your gentoo system the way you want it. Personal attacks are not OK, but he should keep his opinion on what _my_ machine should do for himself. For what it is worth, his systemd is a bug.

> but he should keep his opinion on what _my_ machine should do for himself

Releasing free software and what you accuse him of are entirely different things. Frankly I'd like to understand how you even equate someone releasing software which you aren't even forced to use, to essentially ramming his opinions of how YOUR machine should run down your throat.

The anti-systemd people really aren't coming across at all well in this thread. At lot of what you guys are accusing him of literally makes no sense on the most basic level. This being a prime example.

Don't like systemd? Don't install systemd. Don't like that a distro is bundling systemd? Don't use the distro that is bundling systemd.

The creator of systemd cannot be held responsible for you voluntarily installing the software, leaving it on your system, and then becoming upset about how it works. If you installed systemd and hate it, remove it. It aint' rocket science.

Re: "Open Source is awful in many ways, and people should be aware of this"

#310

Post by Kalium »

Diederich wrote: post #308
Kalium wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes the reader aware of the writer's true position on the matter, adding emphasis and clarity to the situation. It strengthens the impact. It could have been "This code is bad. I will not accept this code.". Except that would not have communicated the same message. It's not always desirable to strip away emotional content.

I agree with that. "It upsets and angers me that you're continuing to make the same mistakes over and over again." vs. 'abortion', etc. Both examples communicate emotional content. Only one of them is verbal abuse.

The old writers' saw runs "Show, don't tell". It speaks to effective communication. It applies here.

Consider which is more effective in person - the phrase "I am angry" uttered in a calm tone of voice or profanity and insults in an angry tone of voice. One of those states anger. The other communicates anger.

Post reply on HN