It’s disgusting that this post has not been removed, has a 96% postive vote ratio, has over 1K upvotes and is sitting at the top of All after almost a day.
This isn’t a Linux meme. It’s a celebration of abuse, abusive behaviour and abusive people.
All the people ITT condoning or making even the slightest accommodations for this behaviour ought to be ashamed and need to take a good, long look in a mirror.
What are the moderators of this community thinking? Are you reading this stuff? Do some of you agree with any of it?
Of all the things to celebrate about Linus and Linux this is not one of them.
There is no value in leaving this post up. There is nothing to be learned or gained by revealing just how gross some supposed Linux supporters may be.
Does anyone ITT seriously think this is how Linus or Linux developers want to be remembered and celebrated for their dedication and decades of toil?
Do you think anyone that’s been on the receiving end of this kind of abuse on the job or in the home wants to jump onto Lemmy today to see this celebration of abusive and awful behaviour.
There are no excuses to be made. It doesn’t matter that this happened many years ago and that Linus has managed to overcome behaving like this. The post itself is now the issue.
The many comments that have made even the slightest excuse for this kind of behaviour are awful and damaging to the reputations of Linus, Linux and the Linux community.
Even those responding to you and trying to justify this, he sets a high bar yeesh. I don’t care who the person is saying it, I don’t care how much the guy he’s responding to deserves it, this is worst boss behavior that I would nope so far away from.
Damn, I really hate social snowflakes such as you. Linus was right and he got his point across quickly and without bulshit. The Kernel Maintainer should have known better. Why exactly is this “abuse”, because he used a few “naughty” words? Grow up. If you want censorship go back to reddit.
While Linus went overboard (as he has a history of doing, and as has also caused negativity to the community), this post is still very well liked because it appears to be a strong example of someone calling out the BS that a lot of developers like to throw around. No one’s going to join in a circle celebrating Linus picking on some first time contributor who didn’t know any better, but that’s how it sounds like you’re interpreting the post.
To add some context, there’s a toxic superiority complex that many developers have where they jump to blame others for issues that actually relate to their code. You can see this anywhere from developers who immediately blame users without investigating to software developers within companies who are quick to pass off issues as not their team’s problem.
So, in this example Linus is actually calling one of these developers out, which is why the post is very well-received.
History must be shared so it’s not repeated. The email is dated 2012 so there’s context of this being some old school bullying. Asking people to Not share the past because it’s ugly is like asking people to not talk about slavery cause it’ll make white people feel bad that they thought it was okay to own people. Small minds will remain small and less you expand their visibility.
Honestly, whether or not we agree with the approach of Linus, these kind of disagreements happen in the real world. Tensions run high. Recently I’ve been on calls where things need to be implemented this month, during a time where most of our resources(engineers) will be on vacation. These kind of conversations can be important to have to make sure this doesn’t happen again. The project management team got their ass handed to them for kneeling to the LOBs’ ridiculous timeline expectations. And they were told to hold the L if things don’t work on the go-live date, there will be no post implementation support until mid January if something doesn’t work.
It’s useful to note that there exists Lemmy servers where down votes are not processed. So the high up vote to down vote ratio isn’t necessarily a reflection of people not down voting, it’s potentially a reflection of the servers that allow down votes along with all other servers (generally they all allow up votes).
You put “quotes” around “feature” as though it is a bug. My instance (the user you are responding to is also a member of Blahaj) does not support downvotes and it is one of the reasons I signed up for it. So, I do feel it is a feature and not a bug.
Here’s a long explanation about why I feel that way:
I think people should be allowed to be wrong on the internet without having a huge negative number hovering over their head. If they’re wrong, people should go to the comments and say why. People absolutely care about that dumb number, and to pretend they won’t or shouldn’t is just not how humans work.
If a comment is controversial, it’s upvote/downvote will be neutral and it’ll get lost. Controversial comments should be read so discussion can form around it.
If the post should be downvoted to oblivion because it’s toxic or offtopic, it should be removed instead.
I feel that downvotes are only useful if the community needs to collectively use it to moderate (I’d argue it had a purpose on Youtube, before they removed it. It could be abused, but it was useful to fight misinformation or product marketing disguised as content).
We’re ultimately talking about which order comments should appear on a post. I don’t think controversial sort should be default, and I don’t want to read the most controversial comments all the time. I think the comments that generate the best discussion and/or are the most valuable should float to the top naturally. Ignoring down votes does this, with the added benefits of removing the possible toxic effects of down votes.
Isn’t showing only upvotes is default in Jerboa?
Dunno, I don’t use it. Don’t need to, my instance doesn’t allow downvotes. If I needed to move from Blahaj for some reason, I might look into it, might not.
Linus only reacted this way to people who really should have known better. This isn’t a “here is my first ever patch, I read all the rules and I hope I didn’t break any” situation. The person he is chewing out is a kernel maintainer. They are someone who is experienced and trusted and Linus was rightly angry that this poor quality work was submitted.
However… Linus has also worked a lot on himself in the past few years, fully acknowledging that he shouldn’t behave this harshly when someone fucks up. If the same situation was to present itself today, he would be much more professional, but would probably still be a bit angry and you’d know about it.
Linus is a flawed human being, but credit where it is due, he has worked on some of his character flaws.
**And I’ll add:**This is the internet. There is no “taking down” of this. In fact, you’re getting angry over a screenshot of the original. Once it’s out there, it’s never getting removed.
The first point of your comment I completely disagree with; the second point acknowledges why the the first point is bullshit to begin with. Yes, someone can be incompetent and require corrective action. This was not it and completely, grossly unacceptable. That he had to adjust his behavior is an acknowledgement to this. We are all flawed humans; but some are more flawed than others. That being said, if it’s true he has reflected and taken corrective action on his own negative behaviors, kudos to him.
I couldn’t disagree more with you, and I truly feel that the lack of being direct is why we have an overwhelming amount of mediocrity in the “professional” corporate world. When everyone is just nice and we go the passive aggressive route, or have constructive feedback in the vein of “I can see you worked sooooo hard on this”, we get garbage.
If you want people to do their minimums, “act your wage” and all that shit, put your efforts accordingly. If you’re trying to be a part of something excellent and eschew mediocrity, then give your best or fuck off.
Well there’s a difference between “it’s not good enough” and " fuck you you fucking code fart". Being direct doesn’t equate to being an asshole. You can be direct while also being respectable and polite. But it’s still funny watching people lose this shit.
ENOENT is not a valid error return from an ioctl. Never has been, never will be. ENOENT means “No such file and directory”, and is for path operations. ioctl’s are done on files that have already been opened, there’s no way in hell that ENOENT would ever be valid.
Linus didn’t call Mauro anything at all, much less a code fart. If anything, then an idiot (indirectly, by saying “I don’t want to hear that kind of garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again”.
How many of the people complaining about the mail being abusive or whatnot actually read it.
Dude, thank you, totally agree. Anyone with skin thin enough to be hurt by this kind of corrective force shouldn’t even be in the conversation. Not sure why people are offended by this on here but when you engineer critical systems you damn well should know better by now.
and I truly feel that the lack of being direct is why we have an overwhelming amount of mediocrity
I think you hit the nail in the head with this. This is probably one of the main reasons why everything is garbage in recent years. Post-modernism reigns supreme, every idea is now a “good idea”.
No Mauro obviously didn’t which is the fucking problem.
If you don’t want to use swear words fine, but usually the tone police doesn’t just want to tone down valuable emphasis, they also want to mess with the semantics of the message until it is insulting by means of assuming that the recipient is a toddler and completely ignores the actual issue, which is that Mauro has a role and responsibility and he failed in it.
On a construction site, if a foreman catches a worker not securing some area that they’re responsible for securing, you can bet your ass that some choice words are going to be heard. That not only saves people’s lives it also protects the worker from going to prison for negligent manslaughter or such. To do that, to have the necessary impact on the worker, yes it’s going to feel bad.
I don’t think it’s necessarily a celebration of abuse. I agree that he’s obviously way out of line sending this email.
I think Linus is (was) a complete asshole who lacks interpersonal skills, and this email exemplifies his character. To me, this post shows the mentality of some developers (and leadership) in FOSS and why some folks find it difficult to contribute to open-source software. This post opens up the discussion on that.
FWIW, I’ve received zero reports on this post itself. But I’ve received reports on abusive comments in this post, which I’ve promptly removed. This community is more/less self-moderating and if the post receives a significant positive vote ratio, I don’t think it should be removed by me. It brings an important discussion to the table regarding acceptable behavior in software development.
I’ve never had a negative experience contributing to open source.
I’ve also been to scrums where everyone is equal, and we have to be very PC, about explaining “processes” and “best practices” to people that break the build pipeline every single day. Eventually I just coded error handling and guard clauses into everything so no one could screw anything up by not following the documentation being a cowboy. That is a best practice, sure, but you’d be surprised by how people break things even after being warned not to do a very specific thing.
A cowboy that fixes things always 24/7 can be a maverick and talk shit.
But in todays PC world you can also be a cowboy that breaks everything always and spends weeks fixing something they themselves broke…
I wish I could say the things Linus said instead of just putting people on a performance improvement plan.
Sometimes being angry is appropriate. When I am I step back and try to figure out solution where the fuck up can’t happen again and no one gets hurt.
I’ve seen people be VERY angry and even hands on working in jobs where fucking up can kill people.
I’d rather see anger than people dying. Did Linus go too far here? Probably, but there is a time and place for anger and being direct.
Linus wrote git to be used via email as part of its core design, so that was just the way he rolled back then. GitHub and Gitlab and all the cloud platforms and tooling came afterwards and it took time to reach a critical mass, and even then, some folks stick to what they’re used to.
Looking at Linus’ GitHub profile, looks like not much has changed — 100% commits, 0% everything else.
This email should have stayed in Draft for a few hours and then come back to remove all the expletives. At least Mauro has something to hang on the wall of his crapper.
yet ppl here mostly dont care about breaking the userspace and use systemd shit that breaks said space. mention it here…get a hated for pointing out lennart poettering is a wanker.
Honestly, I maybe get why some people are too sensitive to work in such conditions, but from my professional experience, I’d much rather prefer getting angry mail explaining why my actions are stupid, than everyone being nice to one another but the codebase is utter garbage and everything falls apart, which happens a lot in private companies.
It’s all fun and games till the baby blows up when it really really shouldn’t blow up. And I personally, would rather have people learn that pain an email than learn that a million people are in pain because of their ignorance/bad work.
you seem to have created a false dichotomy where it’s impossible to fix bad code without being abusive. would you like me to call you “dumb motherfucker” or is this explanation enough?
I think you’ve missed what the sin was, as well as the context of the players.
The sin was not the bad code. Let me say it one more time for clarity: the issue was not the code
The issue was that, when presented with the defect (inevitable outcome of any software project: not intrinsically sinful) Mauro started blaming other people on a public mailing list
Mauro, being a maintainer, was in a position of authority. Like a police officer, their bad behaviour reflected poorly on the organization*as a whole.
If a cop was abusing their power (publicly or not), I expect the chief of police to come down on that abuser; to make clear that this abuse is absolutely unacceptable, not only within the accute instance, but within the greater context of the expectation of the behaviour of the whole organization.
Mauro chose the context of his abusive behaviour as the public mailing list.
Him getting slapped down in that same forum is the direct result of his own choices.
In the same way that I would be upset with the chief of police not publicly and harshy denouncing an abusive police officer, so would I be upset with the absence of such a response in this situation
I didn’t miss the sin. The sin isn’t relevant to me. You don’t treat people like that. Whatever you hope to accomplish, you can accomplish without treating people like that. If someone else is being abusive, that’s not license for you to be abusive in response. If a cop was abusing their power would you expect the chief of police to publicly berate and insult him, or would you expect the standards to be enforced without resorting to that?
When you abuse someone for being abusive you don’t make it clear that abuse is unacceptable. In fact, you do the opposite. You establish that abuse is a part of your culture. If I was considering contributing to the kernel and saw this exchange, I’d walk away. I don’t need that shit, not from Mauro, not from Linus, not from the Lord hisownself. It damages the organization long-term.
It was a hash admonishment for the specific choices and actions that the person did that were wrong , and that the person, based on their position of authority should absolutely know to be wrong.
The confluence of factors here are what differentiates this from abuse. By calling this abuse, you’re actually diminishing what actual abuse is.
Or nice in person, then all the toxic bakstabbing behind the scenes.
This reads like the Sh*t My Dad says book. The author said it seemed harsh to some people, but the bonus was there was never any passive agressiveness, and you always knew exactly where you stood.
Yeah, that’s a hard pass on passive aggressiveness, constructive criticism isn’t either of those things nor rude and angry ranting. Love Linus, but he really did need to chill out a bit more with these things. He could have gotten the same point across without coming across as yelling at the guy, just firmly pointing out that it was caused by the patch, the patch did things it shouldn’t ever do, and don’t break userspace or blame userspace programs
Yeah this kind of attitude is never a productive strategy unless you want to surround yourself only with assholes. It also demonstrates a complete lack of ability to manage humans and keep your values straight when you become upset and stressed out, which is a massive red flag to hold up as someone running a project.
In general it seems like a lot of people get into computers because they think it is a magic fantasy land where you don’t have to practice people skills and interact with other humans… when like every other industry after a certain seniority in a project it always, always, always comes down to managing humans and human interaction skills. The idea of the tech wizard programmer who can be an asshole because they are a genius at coding is just so tired at this point.
No, not at all. I appreciate that of her. She doesn’t even look scary when I’m being told off. Which is why I put the word angry in quotation marks. She tries to sound angry and look scary but we kind of brush it off. Not that I didn’t respect her authority.
Exactly. I’ve worked under terrible managers and some great ones. Great ones get pissed off but they never, ever try and let emotions out. They were all to the point and knew what worked for every guy.
I hate passive-aggressiveness, because I want to know what people really think of me. How can you feel secure if you know that somebody might secretly hate you and is just waiting for the right time to put a knife in your back?
Being polite doesn’t mean being passive-aggressive. I can tell you that I completely disagree with your opinion without calling you “a brainless ape that should’ve fucking stayed in school because your dumb ass cannot comprehend the simplest matters”.
You don’t need to tell each other to shut the fuck up in all caps and call each other idiots to get the point across. It’s possible to instruct your peers in a much more professional manner.
I don’t know the full context, but that message doesn’t sound like it was his first reaction to a first patch he got from that guy. I’m not implying anything, but I’m also no stranger to people resilient to reasoning. I’m not a fan of this tone or language, but I don’t think it’s that big of a deal either
I would tell you that you haven’t worked with enough people. I don’t disagree but occasionally you find people that need a really really good reminder that they not only suck but you’ve tried to be nice multiple times and it didn’t penetrate.
I agree that some people need harder tones, but I don’t think anyone needs the abusive language that Linus used. If that feels like the only option, I think it probably means the person has gaps in their social toolbox.
And also if you are a manager and one of the team members perform poorly and you cannot help the person improve, you should rather let that person go before you get to a state, in which you write such mails.
You can be polite or just straightforward and still get your message across.
“We don’t blame bugs on user programs”, “This is not an error code that should be used here”, “Your coding standards may have relaxed over your tenure, be sure to maintain quality code.”, etc. I get the annoyance, but you can be firm without yelling, especially in a professional environment.
Edit: Seeing the full context of Mauro’s message (posted below), I can see why Linus took this tone. Mauro was being pretty condescending to a dev.
Programmers are sensitive enough. All you have to do is raise your voice slightly, and they’ll think you’re yelling. You could probably make one cry just by saying their patch isn’t good, without having to resort to aggressive language.*
I don’t know the whole history, but this seems highly unnecessary, and typical Linus. Didn’t he resolve to be better a few years ago?
Jesus Christ, telling someone to kill themselves is so beyond just professional considerations – it is basic human decency to refrain from saying such things. I hope he continues to work on his behavior and finds a more productive way to interact with human beings.
lemmy.one
Newest