Linus does not care about you



  • We all know he's a douche, but here's a good summary and why it works:



  • Being a douche is a great thing if you want to spend your life surrounded by other people who are douches. Ask any DOTA2 player.

    Just don't expect any non-douches to show up.



  • ..., a notorious douche said. Clearly, this insight comes from personal experience.



  • After all, why should he care about you and your feelz? You have friends, your spouse, your mom, your rabbi, or your pastor, or your therapist, for exactly this purpose.

    If I'm hired to be in charge of a project, then during my billable hours the project and my own precious ass is ALL I care about. We have deliverables and deadlines, go stuff your feels up your own arse.



  • First - Apple and Microsoft having managers yell at people and call them shit on a regular basis? In these days, when even valid critique can get you slammed with a harassment suit? Yeah, I don't think so.

    Other than that - yep, sometimes yelling at people is a valid technique. Gordon Ramsay makes a living out of it. But:

    • the point is to snap people back when they start acting below their capabilities, and a long rant over e-mail is not exactly suited for that
    • you have to know how hard you can push someone before they snap, and it doesn't look like Torvalds either knows or cares about that
    • you do it to motivate the people you're working with to get better at their work, not to demotivate them from working at your project
    • it's still kind of assholish to people who volunteer on your project and don't expect anything in return except being a part of the community


  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    you do it to motivate the people you're working with to get better at their work, not to demotivate them from working at your project

    Discipline ALWAYS trumps motivation.

    To be productive and competent, you need to be disciplined, motivation comes in the process. If you're not in the mood to act like a competent and responsible developer, go away, you're harming the project and everyone else in it who tries to do a good job.

    @Maciejasjmj said:

    it's still kind of assholish to people who volunteer on your project and don't expect anything in return except being a part of the community

    Some of them are paid by their employers to contribute. Actually, the vast majority of them is.

    The problem with Sarah Sharp was that she tried to be a special snowflake, she stuck herself into a conversation none of which was her business. She got what she asked for. What the actual fuck, Linus was dead calm and polite when arguing with her! But Sharp, just as that asshole Adria Richards of donglefame, created a shitstorm out of something she wasn't even a part of. Good riddance; the USB3 stack in Linux is going to work and be maintained regardless.



  • I don't work in an overly polite environment and I wouldn't want to. If no one tells me my code is utter shit I would blindly believe all my solutions are good.

    Some things you notice yourself, for other things you need an angry colleague.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Looking ahead, I hope that companies and organizations, such as the Linux Foundation, can find a way to empower community managers or other managers to encourage and enforce civil behavior.

    So the Linux Foundation should use Discourse?

    Filed Under: :trolleybus:



  • @hifi said:

    why it works

    The article didn't seems to support the claim that it works, unless you're using the absolute minimum definition of works, as in “the project hasn't yet gone off the rails”. If you're trying to claim that it works effectively, maybe provide some metrics to back that up? Does linux have such things, or do they just barrel forwards with their cock out, no clear idea of where they're headed or where they've been? Even if they did turn out to be as good as a similar-sized corporation, is that really something worth bragging about? We've all seen how many wtfs there are out there.

    Look, if linux was a good manager, he wouldn't need to shout. Yelling during dinner-service is one thing — like, it's been mise-en-place all day, but for the next three hours it's showtime, we don't have time for social niceties — but when you're writing that shit down for an email there's no excuse. I get that he's a socially stunted nerd, and you're probably a socially-stunted nerd too, so you feel you need to stand up for him. That's great. Really. I don't generally get along too well with socially-gifted types in the first place.

    Saying “cut him some slack, he's a programmer not a manager” is one thing, but holding him up as an example of good management practise is a horse of a different color. Normal people find it incredibly stressful working in an environment where nobody knows which way the hammer's gonna fall. You or me might be able to put our nose to the grindstone, put out consistently good work regardless of what shit is flying around outside, but then we'd be doing that regardless. If you're encouraging a hostile work environment for everyone else just to make your own work seem better by comparison, that's a dick move. And it still doesn't show how linux is good at management.


    Also, I found the line in the article about how linux can't fire anybody pretty disingenuous, consider he can — and did — stop merging commits from any developer at any time.



  • @Buddy said:

    If you're trying to claim that it works effectively, maybe provide some metrics to back that up?

    Maybe look at top500.org stats? Sure thing these folks care enough to not use a system that's barely holding itself on the rails.

    But sure thing it actually doesn't work and it's all our imagination. And Red Hat profits solely by selling massive amount of hallucinogens to deluded customers.

    Good luck believing in "metrics" and nice charts, if you prefer that instead.



  • @Buddy said:

    Look, if linux was a good manager, he wouldn't need to shout.

    Guess you would want [url=https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941]shit like this[/url] instead.



  • MOB JUSTICE! NO PEACE!

    <!-- buh -->

  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @wft said:

    Guess you would want shit like this instead.

    Vox Day in his SJWs Always Lie book recommends kicking out SJWs from an organization lest they take over and do just what you posted. I thought that was rather extreme, as well as stooping to their level, but now I'm not sure any more.



  • SJWs are toxic and nonproductive whereas assholes (can be) toxic and very productive. That's the main difference I see here.

    Making people feel happy all the time is not my job, not your job, and not anyone's job. If your feelings are hurt, fuck off. It doesn't help anyone else except for you, and that's selfish as hell. That's my take on things, at least.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @rc4 said:

    SJWs are toxic and nonproductive whereas assholes (can be) toxic and very productive. That's the main difference I see here.

    What's worse is that the person who put in the request wasn't even a contributor to the project. From what I could tell, she just happened to see (or was pointed to) an objectionable post on twitter, then looked at the guys profile and saw that he listed himself as a contributor to the project, then started the Crusade (in the original sense of going to war to smite nonbelievers). [maybe jihad would have been a better word]



  • Of course, which is why that's so absolutely fucking hilarious.



  • Bro, you really need to learn how to pick your battlefields.

    @wft said:

    And Red Hat profits solely by selling massive amount of hallucinogens to deluded customers.

    If profits are an indicator of quality linux ain't shit compared to the competition.

    @wft said:

    >Look, if linux was a good manager, he wouldn't need to shout.

    Guess you would want shit like this instead.

    And if we're doing argument-by-nonsequitur, I will not be outdone: I bet you just want to murder all trans people.


    Anyway, the serious response, not that you deserve it if you're just here to push a political agenda instead of to discuss Linux's management style, is that linux ‘works’ because it's open source. There are a shit load of contributors who get to put ‘Linux kernel dev’ at the top of their cv,a shit load of companies throwing money at the project because it aligns with their strategy. Linux works because it has those resources. That doesn't prove anything about how well they are using those resources.



  • There's a separate controversy going on at the moment about Linus Torvalds and Linux security. The coincidence of timing is interesting.

    I'm thinking that we are seeing a strategy based on disparagement of competitors' security quality--and related stability concerns--exemplified by recent controversies relating to several products including Java; Apache; Flash; Chrome; Firefox; OS X, and, of course, Linux. There are probably others I'm too lazy to dig out.

    The big question would be: Cui bono? Who benefits from raising market concerns about the stability and security of all these products? I'll let you speculate on that.

    I am of the opinion that this particular issue is overblown. Yes, Linus Torvalds writes rude messages; that's nothing knew. He's also very opinionated about the quality and architecture of the Linux kernel; also nothing new. It is, after all, his kernel: despite the fact there are many contributors to it, he is the recognized creator.

    In the case of the message referenced, one can argue with presentation. But, at its core this was a reprimand for violation of standards and for writing broken code. Which of us thinks more real-life companies should not do the same--if with less rude language?



  • I'm reading that discussion. I'm .... baffled. this can't be serious.
    WTF IS WRONG WITH THE WORLD??



  • @CoyneTheDup said:

    Which of us thinks more real-life companies should not do the same--if with less rude language?

    The whole point was that he used rather unprofessional language. Nobody's saying Torvalds should just bend over and take every line of shitty code people send to him, but come on. Those people are doing the job for free, the least he could do is to have some respect towards them as human beings and politely tell them not to send broken code. Not go on a power trip.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Jarry said:

    I'm reading that discussion. I'm .... baffled. this can't be serious. WTF IS WRONG WITH THE WORLD??

    Things will get a lot worse than that if the Progressive/SJW crowd has their way. And yes, it is serious. These are actual people talking about an actual github project.



  • Feels trump all thanks to the helicopter parenting fad of pretty much the last 25 years. You need protection from adults from the big scary world, even when you are an adult.



  • @antiquarian said:

    These are actual people talking about an actual github project.

    I cannot begin to understand the thinking that would produce this statement:

    seeing this kind of attitude in the Ruby community is discouraging me from ever learning it.... unless @elia is removed from the project, I cannot learn Ruby, and thus can't get a job in Ruby development.





  • @HardwareGeek said:

    I cannot begin to understand the thinking that would produce this statement:

    I read the article posted and written by the instigator of the posse:

    It reads like a @flabdablet post. Lots of complaints about how some people have less access, then some non sequiturs about how those people are being kept down:

    One product of this sort of thinking is the division of our skills into “hard” and “soft” categories. Almost every technical conference draws a line based on this false dichotomy. Not surprisingly, marginalized people deliver most of the “soft” talks, while cisgender, white, heterosexual men deliver the more technical, “hard” talks. Value judgements are ascribed to each category of presentation: technical talks are recognized as immediately relevant, while talks addressing the humanity of our profession are relegated to interesting thought exercises or simply as useful breaks to be taken between the “real” talks.

    This reminds me of that video about the "paradox" of gender roles in Norway. I don't know, I don't go to conferences...are these "soft" people not allowed to give "hard" talks?

    Basically, it's about politicizing everything, which is a great way to make yourself miserable and annoy lots of people. But, again, you're "fighting the good fight," so the haters don't matter. The fascistic impulse to blacklist people is bad and runs off the rails in a modern social media world.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    seeing this kind of attitude in the Ruby community is discouraging me from ever learning it.... unless @elia is removed from the project, I cannot learn Ruby, and thus can't get a job in Ruby development.

    Some people have been protected too much from the world when they where young.



  • the worth of the individual is measured not by their humanity, but solely by their intellectual output.

    hey, I built that bridge, the one that exploded when a bird posed on it. but look, I'm really nice to everyone, so, judge me for that.



  • I mean, sure...it's cool to be nice to people, but then to hunt down people who you deem not nice enough and try to get them fired or booted off a project or something is pretty scary. We've talked about this phenomenon in the past.





  • @boomzilla said:

    The fascistic impulse to blacklist people

    ...like, for example, writing off those who express opinions challenging the existing social order as "SJWs" in order to get your warm glowy feels from arbitrarily dismissing their positions as outrageous?

    Yes, that's bad.



  • @flabdablet said:

    ...like, for example, writing off those who express opinions challenging the existing social order as "SJWs" in order to get your warm glowy feels from arbitrarily dismissing their positions as outrageous?

    No, not at all like that. You're confusing "I have a right to make you listenagree to me," with, "I have a right to get you fired because I don't like what you say."



  • What's your position on "at will" employment in general? Do you think that the power to hire and fire should be blunted somewhat by laws covering unfair dismissal?



  • We're getting off topic here, but in general, at will employment makes sense. I think there are some good reasons to have exceptions.



  • @boomzilla said:

    in general, at will employment makes sense. I think there are some good reasons to have exceptions.

    Where does "boss's personal distaste for employee's political beliefs" fit in?



  • @flabdablet said:

    Where does "boss's personal distaste for employee's political beliefs" fit in?

    Probably

    @boomzilla said:

    exceptions

    ...Are you really that daft? (hint: yes)



  • @flabdablet said:

    @boomzilla said:
    in general, at will employment makes sense. I think there are some good reasons to have exceptions.

    Where does "boss's personal distaste for employee's political beliefs" fit in?

    Where do you think they fit in?

    But more interestingly, where does random person who has no connection to or interest in the business fit in? Especially when they have only a tiny bit of knowledge about the employee or what he might have said?



  • @boomzilla said:

    Where do you think they fit in?

    If an employee is civil to the boss, and does their job to a reasonable standard, and is not such a disruptive arsehole as to reduce the ability of other employees to do their jobs to a reasonable standard, then I think dismissing that employee purely for lunchbreak advocacy of e.g. reinstatement of slavery or the advisability of joining a labor union should count as unfair dismissal and cost the boss concerned a lot of wasted time at the very least.

    I also think that any boss who couldn't game any conceivable system of unfair dismissal rules to find plausible grounds for the sacking of any employee they dislike is probably not bright enough to stay a boss for very long.



  • @boomzilla said:

    where does random person who has no connection to or interest in the business fit in?

    Filed under "ignored by owners and management", I would have thought, for the most part.



  • @flabdablet said:

    ... then I think dismissing that employee purely for lunchbreak advocacy of ... the advisability of joining a labor union should count as unfair dismissal

    That definitely will have an effect on the workplace. Employers aren't allowed to discourage such advocacy precisely because it could cause a massive disruption in the workplace.

    @flabdablet said:

    I also think that any boss who couldn't game any conceivable system of unfair dismissal rules to find plausible grounds for the sacking of any employee they dislike is probably not bright enough to stay a boss for very long.

    Here in the US, you are allowed to fire people for any reason, except a specific list of protected reasons. If it ever goes to court, and the employer can't provide reasonable evidence that they had a reason not on the list, they are almost always assumed to have had one of the disallowed reasons. This actually makes it quite hard to game. A lot of people think a boss could simply hold the first minor rule infraction against the employee, but the employee only has to show that he was the only one fired for the infraction and everyone else was given a pass. The judge will usually see through the ruse and hold the employer accountable.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    The whole point was that he used rather unprofessional language.

    Which is the issue with communications of Linus Torvalds. It might be an indication he is a sucky boss, if he actually paid anyone for anything. I agree, and think, that he should make an effort to be less rude.

    But it is not an indication that that Linus is unfit to run the Linux project, or that Linux is not a safe O/S environment; which is what it appears some people are trying to turn these controversies into. It isn't even an indicator that Linus is rude to non-contributors; that was a damn strange assertion, since his message was about code the user contributed to the project--a contribution from a non-contributor...hmmmm.



  • @Jaime said:

    Here in the US, you are allowed to fire people for any reason, except a specific list of protected reasons. If it ever goes to court, and the employer can't provide reasonable evidence that they had a reason not on the list, they are almost always assumed to have had one of the disallowed reasons. This actually makes it quite hard to game. A lot of people think a boss could simply hold the first minor rule infraction against the employee, but the employee only has to show that he was the only one fired for the infraction and everyone else was given a pass. The judge will usually see through the ruse and hold the employer accountable.

    The problem is that to take something to court you need money. If you've just been fired from your job that may be an issue. This is why outside of the US (or even in US states which do not have at-will employment) there are laws that try to level the playing field.

    Of course that doesn't mean that a smart asshole cannot abuse either system to screw over his employer but it is usually the other way around.


  • Dupa


    Linus doesn't care about you

    Finally! I thought he would never stop calling and sending me those letters, erm… I mean pull requests! Yeah, pull requests.


  • Dupa

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    about Linus Torvalds and Linux security

    I love it how this article doesn't say anything concrete, just that there are guys who say that Linux isn't as secure as its competitors and who make money off modifying and selling a "more secure" version.

    Brillant. That's why I don't read those fuckers.





  • A meritocracy I can live with; a bastion of male dominance where women are subjected to scorn and disrespect is a problem.

    The article heavily implies here that in the Linux kernel community, women are subjected to scorn and disrespect is a problem. Then "forgets" to explain or justify that part.

    Either stand by your words or don't say them. Throwing an accusation in the air then pretending it didn't happen is despicable.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @anonymous234 said:

    The article heavily implies here that in the Linux kernel community, women are subjected to scorn and disrespect is a problem.

    It's probably true--to the same extent it happens to men.



  • @wft said:

    Good luck believing in "metrics" and nice charts, if you prefer that instead.

    Yeah, you're talking to a guy who set up a spreadsheet to track our rankings in the card game we've been playing at the office, so suck it. Scum.xlsx

    But the point is you're claiming that Linux is a meritocracy, then putting “metrics” in scare quotes like that, as if actually measuring people's merit is a fundamentally absurd proposition (and I'm not saying that it isn't).

    You're also suggesting that my dislike of Linus's management style naturally follows from my support of feminism, which, while I know Russell wouldn't allow this, I would say provides enough evidence for a reasonable person to conclude that your support of his management style comes from your antipathy toward feminism.

    I'm saying that's fucked up. You're trying to promote something that's bad for everyone—for management-by-tantrum to be an accepted best practise—just because you think that feminists would dislike it more than you would. That's not sensible.



  • Meritocracy doesnt exist. Someone always gets to decide who has merit.



  • Wow, that's a next-level rabbit hole of :scream:

    Way to confirm all of the worst stereotypes about SJWs to whoever did that. For somebody who has never contributed to the project to waltz in and demand that somebody be booted off for a statement on a whole other medium that might have been offensive... You could feel some sympathy for these people who may have been mistreated and oppressed, but then they get themselves a teeny little bit of power, and rapidly prove to be just as bad as anybody who has oppressed them.

    And I see this crowd of people claiming that they aren't willing to use this project because they won't kowtow to the SJWs. I haven't been doing programming that long, but I've worked with several different teams, and I have yet to encounter any situation where somebody recommended not using a tool we wanted to use because one of the designers of that tool supposedly had some unacceptable beliefs. I think it would be hard to take somebody like that seriously. I think that somebody who refused to use a tool that provided legit business value because they didn't like one of the designers would deserve a sacking far more than the guy who supposedly said something mean in a context not related to the project. How many of these people are actually on projects that might make use of this tool, and are in a position to get somebody to not use it because of their personal beliefs without getting laughed out of the room?



  • I still don't get why people justify Torvalds' attitude. You can tear apart people's code and not integrating it into the source tree without using the mailing list as an outlet for your passive-aggresive tendencies. Its not like he's some loony runt with no power. He's the head-honcho of the company (err...foundation), he has the final say on what goes into the tree and what doesn't.

    Now, some people see this diatribe as evidence that Torvalds is a bad-tempered bully. I see a perfectionist who, within his field, doesn’t put up with crap.

    Perfectionist? We are talking about the guy who rejected pax's ALSR patch (implementing a crappy variant in its place) and is fine with the way linux's PRNG is implemented... a prefectionist would certainly raise objection to those things.

    In Accidental Empires, his classic book on the rise of PCs, Robert X. Cringely described Microsoft’s software management style when Bill Gates was in charge as a system where “Each level, from Gates on down, screams at the next, goading and humiliating them.” Ah, yes, that’s the Microsoft I knew and hated.

    Ah, good, Microsoft does it, so its ok I guess (I certainly expected a better argument than an appeal to common practice).

    2/10 would not re-read.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.