Linus Torvalds Taking A Break

You conflated “woman are biologically worse engineers” with “women have smaller brains”. That is somewhat of a misrepresentation, sure, but there’s no reason to suspect you posted it in bad faith.

yes. possibly misinterpreted that.

No, I did not ask for a source on what he said, I asked for a source on Google accepting less secure or less functional code to cater to SJW.

This is the Stallman thread all over again. You guys understand the overall point I’m making, but are nitpicking some nonsensical thing I said based on memory. We’ve cleared it up, I don’t know what or care about what the guy said. My point was Google fired someone for being offensive, violating a CoC, yet their code is still stable and secure.

That’s my point.

Damore was pretty strongly trying to blame differences between men and women on why women don’t enter tech and not cultural or “boys’ club” behavior.

Purely anecdotal, but my wife is getting a PhD in Statistics which involves a good amount of programming and other tech skills and she is pretty turned off by the community/communities and the behaviors generally found acceptable that she sees regularly. If she weren’t as passionate about it she’d probably find something else to focus on for a career.

Anyway this has gone fairly OT now.

1 Like

What I find most distasteful about all this stuff is that it’s all punching down. Men overwhelmingly control the IT and engineering fields, and are trying to keep it that way.

But you were vague about the brain size bit without providing a link. If you claim something and ask for a source then it would be nice to link the other claim.

That’s pretty damn cool :+1:

1 Like

This is what I want sources on. In the other thread, there are claims that “”“milennials”"" are going to bring shitty code to the platform.

In case my editions are being missed.

1 Like

I get your point and i agree with most of it. Just that bit irked me, I actually just wanted to see links to the claim.

This is something I don’t understand. You make a rule that says “no ad hominem attacks” and suddenly bad code has to be accepted? There’s a logical leap in there that I, nor anyone sane, would follow. A lot of reddit discussions are around the same - that somehow this CoC means that you have to accept a commit if the author becomes offended by your rejection. I do not understand how these people are deriving this as a result of the CoC.

6 Likes

Me neither. It is very strange.

I’ve been in similar debates here and there. One was about language, that there is a Right way and a Wrong way. Problem is that a living language evolves over time. This wasn’t accepted, like some kind of fundamentalism. If one thing is changed, then the world is over? Indeed not sane. We get a new word in our language and are richer for it, but somehow that means the end of the world. I truly don’t get it.

This thread is about Torvald’s departure, not the CoC itself.
The discussion about the CoC is taking place here:

If Torvalds was a corporate CEO or CTO, rather than the leader of a weird sort of community, he might have gotten away with the abuse if it was kept private. But, he would have pushed away good developers who happened to have less-than-perfect moments.

If the abuse was visible to the public, well… corporate boards don’t like their names and reputations sullied.

Linux is no longer a geeky developer enthusiam. It’s a mainstream software product with significant financial bets placed on its continued success. Like it or not, Torvalds is the single most public face of Linux – maybe Linux ought not to depend on a single public face – and his behavior shapes mainstream opinion of Linux much more than its technical merits.

Torvalds is not a kid. He’s a middle-aged adult. I hope he gains some insight and returns as a more effective shepherd of his creation.

(I see a lot of really stupid rhetoric online leveraging this incident in some kind of ritual toxic male woman-hating fest. These people also need to take some time off.)

Ok heres the argument to end this shit right now.

The reason this is stupid is its demanding diversity where it doesn’t need to be. It doesn’t matter if you’re white, black, indian, asian, whatever. Idiot code is idiot code. Whats important is diversity of thought. As often as this CoC document has been applied, its aparent that communication basically died and no real benefits came of it, mostly negatives. At that, past uses of the CoC document have been to eject people holding important seats in projects.

Its a bad document. End of discussion. If they don’t change it the kernel dev team will turn into “but my feelings” rather than actually getting work done.

If you want that for the kernel you should probably be aborted from the planet via oversized catapult and a nuclear powered missle.

/s but srsly its a bad doc get over it

Why not accept Linus’ viewpoint as valid, as the project founder, and use it as a a filter for people who need to learn how to handle real world criticism?

Don’t like it? Fork off and maintain your own tree. With SJWs. And cookies. And free hugs or whatever.

Linus is not their employer. He’s a guy on the internet who started a coding project for his own personal use, and if others find it useful, dandy.

3 Likes

I’d hardly use Facebook, Google or Microsoft up as shining examples of proper conduct.

I think a more powerful force influenced his mind…his daughter.

That’s the latest theory anyways. I’m pretty sure you don’t stop being an outspoken abrasive asshole after how many years? pretty sure that kept the ship steering straight so to speak as well.

Either way it doesn’t mean there needs to be some strict code of conduct for contributors and maintainers.

1 Like

His daughter is the neo-feminist type, signed/endorsed an…essay? On how meritocracy is bad for marginalized people or something, by the author of the Contributor Covenant/CoC Linux now uses.

My main issues are that the author wants it to be a political document, and it’s very authoritarian, since it forces you to both abide by it and enforce it with no recourse otherwise if you say wanted to just use the old perfect Code of Conflict instead.

The core ideals behind are to restrict interaction/speech of people the author views as bad, which shouldn’t be a thing outside of harassment and all of that. As noted below

1 Like

Idunno, attempt to call someone out as a Satanist :joy::joy::joy: