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

61–70 of 88 posts

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#61

Post by pphysch »

jcranmer wrote: post #59
pphysch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 R…

FYI, Russia also euphemises their "invasions" as "interventions".

Which is more plausible when the target of your invasion shares a land border with you.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#62

Post by hulitu »

thrownawaydad wrote: post #48
nucleogenesis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest that when the fundamental difference is whether you materially support atrocities and war crimes or not then there should be no possible venue for civil and professional interaction.

Essentially all humans materially support atrocities and war crimes, and historically this has always been true. That certainly includes everyone paying taxes in any major country. We have little choice about that, but we could also materially support efforts to end armed conflict.

> but we could also materially support efforts to end armed conflict.

... if we wanted to ...

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#63

Post by thrownawaydad »

hulitu wrote: post #62
thrownawaydad wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially all humans materially support atrocities and war crimes, and historically this has always been true. That certainly includes everyone paying taxes in any major country. We have little choice about that, but we could also materially support efforts to end armed conflict.

> but we could also materially support efforts to end armed conflict. ... if we wanted to ...

"It doesn't have to be like this // All we need to do is make sure we keep talking" (that's Pink Floyd)

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#64

Post by yucky »

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…

  > arguably it is fair to include interventions in which Wagner is a major player
So then we need to include Blackwater and the like too? Well shit, we're well into the double digits now for US foreign "interventions".

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#65

Post by yucky »

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…

"We came, we saw, he died" ~Hillary Clinton, speaking about our role using the CIA to oust Ghaddafi leading to his death by anal knifing and the resulting power vacuum that they still deal with today. Now in 2023 Libya has open air slave markets[1] and tons of missing uranium[2], another job well done. We have zero moral authority, that ship sailed decades ago.

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/21/595497429/...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/tons-uranium-mis...

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#66

Post by iavael »

klntsky wrote: post #30

In case you didn't know that, Baikal processors are made specifically for russian military and have no civilian use.

Well it's indeed one of major SoC suppliers for Russian military, but actually Baikal SoC are used for various civil purposes too: thin clients, servers, network routers, industrial automation/SCADA, CNC and so on.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#67

Post by iavael »

pvaldes wrote: post #17
pphysch wrote: post #2

[flagged]

This is not about overthrowing anything. Is about damage control. Maybe is safer for Linux to refuse to enter in this viper pit of sanctions and politics until waters calm down a little. Specially in the same day that a team of covered Russian agents were caught in Poland planning several boycotts in NATO territory. The mistrust is not totally unreasonable at this moment. If I understand correctly, the Russian compan…

> If I understand correctly, the Russian company proposed including a patch for their own hardware

Not really. They proposed patches for network drivers for ethernet IP-core which was licensed from Synopsis, California. Most likely as a part of P5600 MIPS IP from Imagination. This IP core is not specific for Baikal SoCs and used in many products.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#68

Post by anonymouskimmer »

pphysch wrote: post #56
anonymouskimmer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Ritual phrasing does not make something professional. And the lack of ritual phrasing doesn't make it unprofessional.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#69

Post by anonymouskimmer »

psychphysic wrote: post #54
anonymouskimmer wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"All I'm hearing is NATO military good guys, everyone else evil."

This is not rational. It's an emotional interpretation of what was written.

Re: Linux maintainer rejects patches from sanctioned Russian Baikal Electronics

#70

Post by klntsky »

iavael wrote: post #66
klntsky wrote: post #30

In case you didn't know that, Baikal processors are made specifically for russian military and have no civilian use.

Well it's indeed one of major SoC suppliers for Russian military, but actually Baikal SoC are used for various civil purposes too: thin clients, servers, network routers, industrial automation/SCADA, CNC and so on.

These are subpar processors for the cost, they are only used when the certification requirements of the govt are in place. Ministry of defence subcontractors hardly count as civilian users.
Post reply on HN