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

Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 88 posts

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#51

Post by hulitu »

arp242 wrote: post #22
pphysch wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has invaded 2 sovereign countries since 2000; USA has invaded at least 4. That's roughly the same order.

Afghanistan was ruled by a bunch of religio-fascist nutjobs. Iraq was ruled by a genocidal dictator. Does that mean those wars were a good idea? By my estimation, probably not, for a number of reasons. But they're not they're same thing at all as Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It's borderline bad-faith to even compare it. I don't which other two you're referring to, but I'm willing to bet they're not the same thing at…

> Afghanistan was ruled by a bunch of religio-fascist nutjobs

From an atheist perspective, the US looks exactly like being ruled by "religio-fascist nutjobs"

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#52

Post by crypt47 »

arp242 wrote: post #9
pphysch wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Baikal is kind of a political project to start with. They were already sanctioned by the Obama admin because they were "associated with military procurement activities, including the development of computer systems for military end-users and the production of computers for nuclear research". That was rescinded a year later. Now it's back for reasons that should be obvious. You can ignore what's going on in the world…

So there was nothing wrong when Raiser killed his wife to keep his FS in kernel, right? Everybody felt comfortable? But now when "Reds" involved, it's different!

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#53

Post by crypt47 »

arp242 wrote: post #12
vfclists wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't any of the major US companies involved with Linux have huge contracts with the DoD? Didn't IBM the current owner of Redhat supply equipment to the Nazis which was used to document and track Jews? By the way who are the "We" in "We don't feel comfortable accepting patches from or relating to hardware produced by your organization."?

I don't know who the "we" is; you have to ask the person who sent that message. Presumably it's the people responsible for that code. I explicitly mentioned IBM's involvement in the holocaust. But that's a historical event; not an on-going one. You can trace the genealogy of almost everyone an everything to something evil if you go back far enough. I think comparing the Russian and US military is a false equivalence.…

> Do I think the US is innocent? No. But it's just not on the same order.

It really depends on propaganda. Sadly, you don't get it. IMHO open source shouldn't be a place to decide who's wrong or who's right.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#54

Post by psychphysic »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #29
psychphysic wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I'm hearing is NATO military good guys, everyone else evil. Somehow I should be agreeable to US weapons teams mainlining patches say for whatever weapon killed that random.man and his children during the fall of Kabul. But not a nasty North Koreans?

If that's all you're hearing you are so overly emotionally invested that it's blinding you to context. No one is saying that citizens and corporations of non-aligned countries shouldn't submit patches which are accepted by the maintainers. They're saying that citizens and corporations of countries which are engaged in hot, cold, or proxy wars with the countries of citizenship of the maintainers shouldn't have patches…

This is silly cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And for your users too.

It's very rich to claim I'm too emotionally invested (because I'm rationally assessing the situation??) in the topic then go one about the emotional investment (comfort) of the maintainer to justify their view...

That's classic projection.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#55

Post by pvaldes »

vfclists wrote: post #26
arp242 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know who the "we" is; you have to ask the person who sent that message. Presumably it's the people responsible for that code. I explicitly mentioned IBM's involvement in the holocaust. But that's a historical event; not an on-going one. You can trace the genealogy of almost everyone an everything to something evil if you go back far enough. I think comparing the Russian and US military is a false equivalence.…

> I think comparing the Russian and US military is a false equivalence. Do I think the US is innocent? No. But it's just not on the same order. Seriously? Setting aside those that the US was directly involved in such as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, how about the war between and Iraq and Iran that the US urged Saddam Hussein on which resulted in about 500,000 dead, for starters? In those days Saddam was the bestie o…

"Dear Linux fairly. As I said for a year I have nuclear weapons that I want to trow over Europe but their CPU's were designed for Mandrake and we lost the installation disc. It will not run the newest redhat anymore. Sourceforgevik couldn't helped with our technology dependences and I'm very sad for this.

Please include support in the kernel for fixing my hardware problems so I can bomb Finland and Swedden, Thanks.

XOXO, Vlad"

What they mean with "good try man, but that would be extremely stupid?" This is soo unfair!! Grenada!! Panama!!

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#56

Post by pphysch »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #36
pphysch wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's about real sanctions, they should say so. They don't even have to be that specific. Because right now it looks like a Polish/EE guy using geopolitical events as an excuse to bully his national enemies on the internet. It's a politically-correct "f__k off and never come back". Totally unprofessional.

It doesn't even say "never come back", it says for the time being don't contribute, because of the organization you belong to, not because of who you are personally. And Jakub is saying that "we don't feel comfortable". Discomfort can be for multiple reasons, not all of which may be known to the person (or given the "we", possibly people) feeling uncomfortable. Asserting boundaries is rarely bullying. And I personall…

A professional reply would start like: "Thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, due to uncertainty surrounding sanctions associated with your organization, we cannot accept your patches (...)".

This is not that.

The key is that the onus is clearly on the sanctions themselves, not the uncomfortable feelings of a mysterious "we".

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#57

Post by pphysch »

jcranmer wrote: post #33
pphysch wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has invaded 2 sovereign countries since 2000; USA has invaded at least 4. That's roughly the same order.

If you're going to count the US roles in interventions in Libya and Syria as "invading a sovereign country," it is only fair that you apply the same logic to Russia. This means you have to at least include Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war--which is larger than the US role in Libya or Syria, natch--and arguably it is fair to include interventions in which Wagner is a major player, which includes Libya, Mal…

This is false. The Syrian government invited Russian assistance against the combined invading forces of US/Israel/Turkey/ISIS. Accepting an official invitation is by definition not an "invasion". Heck, Assad was in Moscow just days ago! You are out of your depth here.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#58

Post by pphysch »

arp242 wrote: post #28
pphysch wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you realize how Orwellian it is that you cannot name some of the most prolific and brutal invasions that the #1 superpower has carried out during your own lifetime? This is basic historical literacy. Libya and Syria (ongoing) are the obvious ones you are missing. Anyways, I'm not going to play the "let's take turns justifying the illegal invasions of distant sovereign countries" game.

United States never invaded Libya or Syria in the same way as Russia invaded Ukraine, or the US invaded Iraq. Both are essentially civil wars where the US was (and continues to be?) involved, but that's not the same thing as an invasion. You can dismiss it as a "game", but the reasons and specifics of the situation DO matter. A lot. Denying this means, for example, that the Nazi invasion of Poland is just the same as…

When you aggressively invade and destroy the government of a sovereign country, there is chaos, a power vacuum and civil war. This is what Washington did in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria (failed).

Arguing that Washington technically didn't invade any of these countries because there were already internal tensions is laughably stupid (what has been happening in Donbass since 2014?). Kindly knock it off.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#59

Post by jcranmer »

pphysch wrote: post #57
jcranmer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to count the US roles in interventions in Libya and Syria as "invading a sovereign country," it is only fair that you apply the same logic to Russia. This means you have to at least include Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war--which is larger than the US role in Libya or Syria, natch--and arguably it is fair to include interventions in which Wagner is a major player, which includes Libya, Mal…

This is false. The Syrian government invited Russian assistance against the combined invading forces of US/Israel/Turkey/ISIS. Accepting an official invitation is by definition not an "invasion". Heck, Assad was in Moscow just days ago! You are out of your depth here.

I used the terminology "intervention", and not "invasion", for a reason.

If you're going to quibble, the US never sent any forces to Libya. France and the UK provided aerial support to a no-fly zone imposed by a UN resolution, with the US providing some naval support as well. So why does that qualify as an "invasion"?

(Actually, if you really want to quibble, Russia has invaded Ukraine twice in the past decade--the Russian invasion of Crimea/Donbass in 2014 should probably be counted as distinct from the invasion effort starting in 2022, given that they provided very different levels of support and had very different material war aims.)

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#60

Post by arp242 »

hulitu wrote: post #51
arp242 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan was ruled by a bunch of religio-fascist nutjobs. Iraq was ruled by a genocidal dictator. Does that mean those wars were a good idea? By my estimation, probably not, for a number of reasons. But they're not they're same thing at all as Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It's borderline bad-faith to even compare it. I don't which other two you're referring to, but I'm willing to bet they're not the same thing at…

> Afghanistan was ruled by a bunch of religio-fascist nutjobs From an atheist perspective, the US looks exactly like being ruled by "religio-fascist nutjobs"

Not really; I have plenty of quibbles with the GOP, but its nowhere near the Taliban. Your somewhat racist and sexist uncle is also not literally Hitler.
Post reply on HN