Linux Sucks presentation interrupted by a higher being



  • Each year, OSS advocate Brian Lunduke makes a silly little "Linux Sucks" presentation, where he lists everything that's (currently) wrong with the world of Linux.

    This year, the presentation was pretty boring... until the part linked below.

    Just... just watch it.

    "Linux Sucks" - 2016 – [29:05..48:46] 48:46
    — Bryan Lunduke


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    @cartman82 said:

    part linked below.

    ...


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    Hah. This should be in Funny Stuff.



  • @blek said:

    Hah. This should be in Funny Stuff.

    For me it's in between humor and cringe. WTF seemed the safer bet.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    Well, I get what you mean, but then again this is among the least cringe-worthy things I've seen Stallman do.



  • @cartman82 said:

    part linked below.

    ...


    I like the potato part. But I have no idea what the "part linked" is supposed to refer to.


  • sockdevs

    That does the image of open source no favours whatsoever.


  • area_can

    When I clicked play it started playing at 29 minutes.



  • Oh. I clicked on the title inside the video player so I could open it in a new tab. Apparently this is an issue with the embedded player and not with Discourse.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    If your browser insists on starting the video at the beginning, use the seekbar to move to 29:05.



  • Btw, I think most awesome features in computing breeds in *nix (Linux or BSD) platforms, especially the networking related ones.



  • How many pieces of his own body did he peel off and eat?

    I mean how can you possibly set the bar LOWER then his past performances.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    How many pieces of his own body did he peel off and eat?

    None (on camera; what he did off-camera I really don't want to know).



  • I thought it was funny. It was obviously a nod to the jokes that circulate about Stallman's overbearing love of FOSS. I thought it was pretty creative.



  • Ok so I actually listened to most of the talk, it basically goes like this:

    • Name-dropping of people who are only famous in the Linux community saying Linux sucks
    • Stupid potato bullshit
    • Talking about how awful SystemD is, without bothering to explain what it does better than previous init systems
    • Statistics showing that Linux is a huge failure
    • Talking about how great SystemD is because it's "trying something different" still without bothering to explain what it does better than previous init systems
    • Some bullshit about how a website called "distrowatch" means Linuxes are not a huge failure for some reason? I didn't really follow this argument.
    • Recapping all of those name-dropped people who all (shockingly!) went on to say how great Linux is despite the fact that one of them was saying how great it was after it wasted an hour and a half of its time due to a stupid bug. (Piers Anthony, still included for some reason, gives the stereotypical Micro$oft monopoly guyzzz! Slashdot argument.)

    There, now you don't have to watch it.

    If I were a SystemD developer, I'd be fucking pissed at this talk. Jesus. You try to help a shitty OS join the 21st century, and the best this asshole can say about your product is, "well they're trying something different, I guess that's good, shrug?" What a jerkhole.

    Ironically, he also in the same talk lamented about how the dumb features Linux people think are so great (but are not) like virtual desktops have been adopted by all the more mainstream OSes. So you'll point out Windows 10 took a feature from Linux, and neglect to mention ALL THE FEATURES SYSTEMD TAKES FROM WINDOWS? What a jerkhole.

    Where do you think ALL OF THE IDEAS IN SYSTEMD (which is so awesome and great and represents everything good about Linux) CAME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE?!

    He does, justly, call out people who use the term "GNU/Linux" as being stupid idiot morons who should die, so that's a positive.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    and neglect to mention ALL THE FEATURES SYSTEMD TAKES FROM WINDOWS?

    Well, that wasn't really the point of the talk, now was it?

    @blakeyrat said:

    He does, justly, call out people who use the term "GNU/Linux" as being stupid idiot morons who should die, so that's a positive.

    Well, duh, maybe you'd finally look good in comparison!



  • For compatiblity's sake, I never like systemd and wish distros choose upstart instead, sadly most distros decided to move away from it.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    Piers Anthony

    Piers Anthony the Xanth novelist? I didn't know he was till alive.



  • The dude doing the talk spends like literally 58 minutes explaining how old he is.

    I dunno why, he seemed healthy enough.



  • Checking Hi Piers website... the website updated on 2016/01/01 and no indication of any sad news, so I assume he is still alive.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Statistics showing that Linux is a huge failure

    The statistics showed that people weren't Googling for the Linux kernel. Just like people don't Google for "I want to install the Trident browser".


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @cheong said:

    Checking Hi Piers website... the website updated on 2016/01/01 and no indication of any sad news, so I assume he is still alive.

    I haven't read an Anthony book in probably 15 years or longer. Apparently he's got like 40 Xanth books out now, but Wikipedia says the last two are in some kind of publisher dispute. Couldn't find anything else about that in the time I was willing to spend searchign.



  • @FrostCat said:

    searchign

    The time you were willing to spend spellchecking was not enough, much to your chagrin.



  • I'm glad you take everything I type here so seriously, Ben L.



  • His previous presentations were much more technical. This one was mostly fluff.



  • God I hate that guy and I hate this video.

    My favorite one of his talks was where he bitched about windows for 30 minutes and then proudly proclaimed that linux desktop is catching up to windows xp. Windows 7 was only better in almost every way for about half a decade at the time.


  • sockdevs

    I've posted in this thread already; why the fuck is it 'new'?



  • @cartman82 said:

    This one was mostly fluff.

    This. But at least it was somewhat amusing fluff - I've certainly been to worse "fluff"-talks (like 50% of all keynotes I've ever attended).


  • Dupa

    @blakeyrat said:

    Talking about how awful SystemD is, without bothering to explain what it does

    Hey, he did say what it does. It takes all the stuff from his parents' kitchen and puts it onto his derby car, thus making him lose a race 30 years ago.

    GO SYSTEMD!

    Also: this guy has far too high-pitched voice to be able to enjoy his talks. :frowning:



  • His anti-systemd thing is the typical boring "it does too much stuff" argument moron Linux users use.

    His pro-systemd thing is "well I guess they're trying new stuff I guess?"

    Both of those arguments are utter shit.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Both of those arguments are utter shit.

    Yeah, more stuff onto the pile of "blakey doesn't understand it."



  • I do understand it. The arguments are just crap.

    "Complex" isn't a criteria for judging software. If he's trying to say it's less stable, crashes more often, that would be a valid complaint but even in the talk he admits it works fine. If he's trying to say it's slower, well, it's not-- it's significantly faster, both for boot time and for developing/installing services/daemons.

    The thing that's missed is it's not more complex for no reason. It's more complex because it does a better job at a ton of things. Now maybe it's more complex than it absolutely needs to be to get the job done but, again, "complexity" is not a criteria for judging software unless all-else-is-equal, and it's not in this case.

    Is my Ford Fusion more complex than my 1986 Mitsubishi Cordia? Yeah. Is it slower? No. Less reliable? No. Have fewer features? No. Less comfortable? No. Less fuel efficient? God no. Etc.

    Complexity is not a valid criteria unless literally all else is equal.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The thing that's missed is it's not more complex for no reason.

    False. There is something being missed here, but it's not by those guys.



  • @boomzilla said:

    False.

    Ok. You can believe what you want, but you're not going to change my mind with "false".

    BTW, apparently "false" isn't a sentence according to a bunch of people in that announcement thread, so you better be careful.

    @boomzilla said:

    There is something being missed here, but it's not by those guys.

    Ah shit, my telepathy is on the blink again. Who the fuck are "those guys"? Are you like pointing to a group of people in real life and too stupid to realize I can't see you? Like a 3-year-old on the telephone?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Ok. You can believe what you want, but you're not going to change my mind with "false".

    You're not going to change my mind with silly ideas about complexity, either.

    @blakeyrat said:

    BTW, apparently "false" isn't a sentence according to a bunch of people in that announcement thread, so you better be careful.

    Right. It's not a sentence. But I'm good enough to be able to communicate in varied ways, so those guys can suck it.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Ah shit, my telepathy is on the blink again. Who the fuck are "those guys"? Are you like pointing to a group of people in real life and too stupid to realize I can't see you? Like a 3-year-old on the telephone?

    You're kind of funny when you pretend to be dumb.



  • I honestly don't know who "those guys" are. If you're not willing to actually communicate, don't bother posting. It's just a waste of everybody's time.

    I mean I could guess, but it's between "those guys" being the guys who develop systemd, the guys who complain about systemd, or the guys who wrote the presentation, and the sentence's meaning changes drastically depending on who "those guys" are. I guess I have a 1-in-3 chance of getting it right.


  • Dupa

    @blakeyrat said:

    Both of those arguments are utter shit.

    Well, you :whoosh:ed a bit (or did you?) but overall I agree with you. It is a shitty talk. It's too improvised, too much all around the place and the guy is acting much too hysterically.

    Stallman was indeed funny, though. :laughing:



  • OK, so you're just dumb if you can't figure out that "those guys" are the people whose arguments you're talking about.


  • sockdevs

    @kt_ said:

    Stallman was indeed funny, though

    He was about as funny as a double-homicide crime scene.



  • Fine I'm dumb. Stupid dummy dodo-brain. Derp derp derp. Whatever.

    Now refute my argument. It ought to be pretty easy for you, since I'm so dumb.



  • @kt_ said:

    Stallman was indeed funny, though.

    Purposefully or accidentally?

    Because if the answer is "purposefully", then I'm afraid the doctors will have to operate-- your sense of humor is dead.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Now refute my argument. It ought to be pretty easy for you, since I'm so dumb.

    Complexity has a cost. You may disagree with someone else's estimate of the cost, but to say that an argument based on it is shit is, well, shit.

    EDIT: I don't really care all that much one way or the other about systemd, but we've already yelled about it a lot elsewhere around here. Go back and read that stuff if you want.


  • Dupa

    @blakeyrat said:

    e answer is "purposefully", then I'm afraid the doctors will have to operate-- your sense of humor is dead.

    Call a doctor! No, call an undertaker! :laughing:



  • @boomzilla said:

    Complexity has a cost.

    It possibly makes it more difficult to develop new features in the future and fix bugs. That's... it. That's not much of a cost.

    Just like my Ford (CAR ANALOGY), sure it's more complicated under the hood and requires a mechanic with more training when it breaks down, but it's simultaneously 4 times more reliable so that cost is by far worthwhile.

    I don't know for sure if systemd is more reliable to the point where the cost is worthwhile, but it certainly could be. Everything's a tradeoff. But I do not it's not bad merely because it's complicated. Because that's an idiotic argument.

    What's more likely is that all the Linux old-timers hate it not because it's worse, but because it's different. They hate change. Same reason they're all using a CLI from 1975. And the only reason people bring up "complexity" is because it's pretty embarrassing to admit that your only reason for hating it is you hate change.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    It possibly makes it more difficult to develop new features in the future and fix bugs. That's... it. That's not much of a cost.

    LOL



  • Ok well whatever. If you're not even going to try, neither am I.

    I'm disappointed, Boomzilla. A "wrong", a calling me dumb, then a "LOL"? What the fuck is this shit. YouTube comments are better.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I'm disappointed, Boomzilla. A "wrong", a calling me dumb, then a "LOL"? What the fuck is this shit. YouTube comments are better.

    The benefit of oxygen is that you will be able to breathe. That's...it. That's not much of a benefit.



  • If you seriously think the only factor in software quality is complexity, then so be it I suppose.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    why

    Because Discourse.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    If you seriously think the only factor in software quality is complexity, then so be it I suppose.

    If you seriously think that I think that the only factor in software quality is complexity, then so be it I suppose.


Log in to reply
 

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