I feel the same way about Linus with Linux. I know people say to separate the art from the artist, but when you are openly abusive to your users for decades on end, with barely any remorse, and continue to do so today, it just does not make me want to use your product.
When was linus/Linux ever "openly abusive" to users ?
He can get pretty heated in arguments on the LKML for sure, but those are arguments between devs, and usually for the benefit of the user.
I still think this way of working out disagreements sucks, but as a user it does not really affect me at all.
And other OS'es abuse their users on a whole other level and I'm quite sore that some of apples/microsofts middle managers can also be quite abusive to their devs behind closed doors, with linux it's just all in the open...
First, User space != users. Second, he's berating that kernel maintainer saying that even if user space does something absurd, the kernel accommodates such absurdity. The user space program being bad, doesn't give the kernel any reason to break it intentionally.
Actually, these are pretty bad examples. Both of those fits of anger ultimately come down to caring about the users, but especially the NVIDIA one. I eventually gave up and switched to AMD graphics, but from 2004 to at least around 2016 I was running NVIDIA graphics on Linux and their increasing apathy towards Linux desktop users and Linux in general was clear. It just now is getting better, long after Torvalds complained about it, and even then it'll be a long time before things are stable and in good shape for most users. (e.g. only RTX 20xx cards are covered by the new "open" drivers, for example.)
On the contrary, I really think Linus is a shining example of caring about the users. He often seems to be one of the top advocates of the "never break userspace" mentality, a position I respect.
I will grant you that he does sometimes say things on LKML that are inflammatory or at least angry (less so these days to be sure) but personally I prefer the unfiltered honesty. I believe most humans can admit that they've felt like Linus does in his rants at times. People have criticized the way that he speaks, but I believe his anger is very often because he cares about the users.
I have now listened to the episode. I see a lot of judgement that becomes moot when you take his autism in consideration. It obviously doesn't absolve him from the crime, and it _seems_ to be pretty clear that he did it. It does provide possible alternative explanations for a lot of his actions, both pre and post crime.
I'm also reminded of this post [0] a coworker shared recently that I think a lot of people would benefit from reading.
His father (Ramon Reiser) used it as defense back when he was accused (but Nina's body was not yet found). It simply explains a lot of his (odd) reasoning and behavior. It does not absolve him from his behavior, nor does it acquit him from time in prison for his criminal deeds.
Also, I'm on the spectrum, and recognize a lot of behavior. I have been accused by my neighbors of a crime. One I did not commit (I did not abuse my children, sexually or otherwise), but you know how that goes? Gossip.
As for the podcast, I read the transcript (in less time than the podcast would take, as I skimmed through some parts). It had a lot of unnecessary content, and missed some details (such as the one I mentioned) but it was alright. It is a sad story.
Agree on all counts. I'm sorry you had to go through an unfair accusation. I've been there and it sucks.
> It simply explains a lot of his (odd) reasoning and behavior. It does not absolve him from his behavior, nor does it acquit him from time in prison for his criminal deeds.
100 times yes. That was what I was trying to convey, though mostly from the point-of-view that the police, public opinion and the podcaster have used his behaviour to amplify his guilt and the perception of him being a monster.
I don't even see why anyone would need any more than the fact that he murdered his children's mother to condemn him. Everything else is irrelevant and not necessarily an indication that he was going to commit a crime, as the podcast suggests. I guess it wouldn't make for nearly as much a compelling and revolting story.
19 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 47.7 ms ] threadHe can get pretty heated in arguments on the LKML for sure, but those are arguments between devs, and usually for the benefit of the user.
I still think this way of working out disagreements sucks, but as a user it does not really affect me at all.
And other OS'es abuse their users on a whole other level and I'm quite sore that some of apples/microsofts middle managers can also be quite abusive to their devs behind closed doors, with linux it's just all in the open...
> We don't merge kernel code just because user space was written by a retarded monkey on crack
- Linus Torvalds
Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYWzMvlj2RQ
These are examples of a committed champion and friend of users defending their interests.
We might disagree on the definition of abusive though.
I will grant you that he does sometimes say things on LKML that are inflammatory or at least angry (less so these days to be sure) but personally I prefer the unfiltered honesty. I believe most humans can admit that they've felt like Linus does in his rants at times. People have criticized the way that he speaks, but I believe his anger is very often because he cares about the users.
And btrfs also suffers from issues. ZFS happened. On Solaris, FreeBSD, and Linux.
I'm curious about what you think is the relevance of this. Would you mind expanding on it a bit?
> And btrfs also suffers from issues.
Is this the write hole thing? Non-technological issues? Something else? What's the relevance?
> Hans was autistic.
I have now listened to the episode. I see a lot of judgement that becomes moot when you take his autism in consideration. It obviously doesn't absolve him from the crime, and it _seems_ to be pretty clear that he did it. It does provide possible alternative explanations for a lot of his actions, both pre and post crime.
I'm also reminded of this post [0] a coworker shared recently that I think a lot of people would benefit from reading.
[0] https://autisticscienceperson.com/2021/01/09/neurotypicals-l...
Also, I'm on the spectrum, and recognize a lot of behavior. I have been accused by my neighbors of a crime. One I did not commit (I did not abuse my children, sexually or otherwise), but you know how that goes? Gossip.
As for the podcast, I read the transcript (in less time than the podcast would take, as I skimmed through some parts). It had a lot of unnecessary content, and missed some details (such as the one I mentioned) but it was alright. It is a sad story.
> It simply explains a lot of his (odd) reasoning and behavior. It does not absolve him from his behavior, nor does it acquit him from time in prison for his criminal deeds.
100 times yes. That was what I was trying to convey, though mostly from the point-of-view that the police, public opinion and the podcaster have used his behaviour to amplify his guilt and the perception of him being a monster.
I don't even see why anyone would need any more than the fact that he murdered his children's mother to condemn him. Everything else is irrelevant and not necessarily an indication that he was going to commit a crime, as the podcast suggests. I guess it wouldn't make for nearly as much a compelling and revolting story.
This one was a very interesting episode and made better since I had never heard the story before.