Linus doesn’t love that, he literally got therapy to not be like that. Maybe there’s a lesson there for you.
In fact, in a more recent talk he mentioned being horrified at the sort of people who liked how he spoke and the way they assumed he shared their political opinions as a significant motivator.
I just love people that don’t beat around the bush and are straight to the point. We have enough snowflakes and bullshitters in this world IMO. Everyone’s so sensitive all the time, like… grow up and own your mistakes. And a wake up call guy like Linus is exactly what people need.
But, having one definitely raises alarams about the seriousness of the issue… and this was a serious issue, not breaking user space is why we’re still using Linux. If it broke something on every update, I’m sure we would have opted for something else a long time ago… so would every server on this earth, as well as Google for Android.
If you think it is acceptable to lash out at someone you’re mean and if you can’t find ways to communicate clearly without lashing out you’re a bad communicator.
Linux/open source has a massive problem with finding maintainers and contributors for critical projects and a significant contributor is just how awful the communication culture of programmers is.
Nope, actually I’m fairly calm. I only lash out when others do it at me first, but I own up (not lash out) if I was to blame. And the guy did own up, and that’s great IMO, he admitted he was wrong. Bravo 👏.
Kernel devs are like mini-gods, so I can understand them being with their nose up in the clouds a bit… and they completely deserve that, they’re the driving force behind what we use every day, for free I might add. But, since Linus started the whole thing, it’s his show, he’s running it. If he doesn’t like what’s being done, and especially if it’s bullshit code, yes, I completely understand him lashing out… I might not do it that way, but I feel that there is nothing wrong with that either.
Honestly, with this response although I think he didn’t deserve all of that from Linus, he did deserve quite a bit of it. So condescending and smug to application developers that actually make the user experience of Linux a good thing.
Okay, I agree that this is a really dickish way to respond to a dev, and I can see Torvald’s message being as much an olive branch to app devs as it was a thorough humbling of the maintainer. Still wouldn’t call it professional, but… I get it.
Seeing the rest of the thread really contextualizes Linus’ anger.
Only seeing the message from Linus makes him look like a dick. But when you see that he’s responding to someone deflecting blame and being a shithead to the guy trying to report a problem and provide a suggested fix, the aggressive response seems more justifiable.
Yes. I did not include patch from first person in screenshot because I thought it would make it too boring to read. But it kinda adds even more to context.
Replying to “I get this regression with KDE on this system caused by this commit and here how I fixed it” with “lol, pulseaudio sucks, opensuse sucks” of course will make Linus angry and he will reply not only “no u”, but also “and here’s why”.
So Linus should have sided with someone who in regression report of KDE using 100% CPU starts blaming pulseaudio and opensuse and double down on blaming pulseaudio? Instead of fixing syscall returning completely unrelated error code. It’s like if your router crashed with message “there is no milk in your fridge”.
There’s a difference between disagreeing with someone and insulting and attacking someone, and if you can’t tell that there’s a difference you can go fuck yourself with a cactus, you cumdrowned dicksphincter.
Honestly, if such incompetent developers weren’t as arrogant as to argue how their bullshit is the right way to go, I would agree with you. But instead their bullshit philosophy is the expected way to work in many places, and it’s the cancer of computer development, so the anger is deserved IMO.
For sure. It’s funny in a way, but this is not a great way to treat folks that are trying to contribute, often on their own time. This could have been rephrased in so many other ways where Linus doesn’t come off as a total jerk, and still be “right” with the same message.
This is a message to an @redhat address, as you might notice. Mauro gets paid to work on the kernel and is not a noob who doesn’t know better, either, he’s a maintainer who fucked up basic maintenance.
I just wish for all of us to become more accustomed to working on ourselves instead of projecting the need to develop virtue on others. Linus actually did it, doesn’t mean that he was an asshole before. Brash, sure, crass, yes, but actual assholes don’t calm down as easily.
I kindly disagree with most of what you said. Linus is brilliant, and I appreciate his contributions not just to technology and freedom but also to society. However, this does not pardon the hardships he has also brought upon others.
It’s important to be honest in code reviews, but his language, while also honest, goes far and beyond that. We’re doing ourselves a disservice defending this behavior as if it’s a standard of communication quality that people should strive for, or learn how to behave like.
Current-day Linus wouldn’t react much differently. Cut the “shut the fuck up”, the one or other “fuck” (but not all, some need to be there for emphasis), done. It’s the real personal shit, the “should be aborted retroactively” stuff, that he cut out. “Obvious garbage and idiocy” is a technical term, programmers apply it to their own work all the time. Compilers are more technical in their language but we know what they mean.
And was this mail, seen in its total impact, a hardship? He went down hard, yes, and thousands upon thousands of Linux users breathed a sigh of relief, seeing that Mauro’s attitude towards userland doesn’t fly.
The hardest-hitting sentence in that mail is actually “You have shown yourself to not be competent in this issue”. Absolutely devastating. Taking context into account it’s the equivalent of telling a professional cook that their ingredients suck, what they did with them sucks, and most of all that the gall which which they claimed that the customer is wrong about their dinner sucking is completely, and utterly, unprofessional.
Of course that’s hard on Mauro. There’s no way to tell someone about such an epic cock-up without being hard. But not going that far, avoiding that hardship for some notion of civility, now that would be right-out cruel.
Please defend these statements for me. I’m having a hard time understanding how this is language we should strive for in a code review, even with your explanation.
As to tone: How is “this is not up for discussion” and “obvious mistakes and thoughtlessness” any better? As a reader I’d be inclined to think that you think of me as having the emotional maturity of a toddler.
I believe that excellent communication can be had without engineers swearing at each other, and I don’t think there are is any good rationale that warrants such behavior. You believe that there is a time and purpose for the style of conversation that Linus portrayed, and it is warranted and effective behavior.
I’m going to agree to disagree from here. Thanks for the conversation.
and I don’t think there are is any good rationale that warrants such behavior
For one, the boss setting the tone as to include “shut up” means that you won’t get written up for responding in a similar register. It allows for emotionality, instead of burdening the recipient of the dress-down not just with addressing their own behaviour, but also the emotional labour to respond in a way the tone police deems acceptable. Maybe paradoxically (for people lacking emotional intelligence), that makes emotional responses less likely as the recipient isn’t as emotionally boxed in, doesn’t see walls in every direction.
The line that you shouldn’t cross is making things personal – talking about what someone (presumably) is, instead of what they did. But that applies to any register, “Please come to HR to discuss your identity” isn’t someone anyone should ever hear. Persons can be demeaned and belittled, but not behaviour: Behaviour doesn’t have emotions, dignity, whatever.
This has some real “don’t be intolerant towards the intolerant” energy.
Yes, sometimes insults are justified. No, when an employee/volunteer helper doesn’t share your view is not one of those times. Yes, when you’re confronted with a toxic fuck and those defending his toxic behavior is one of those times.
There’s a hell of a difference between calling random commenters “dickriders” and having your boss, whom you have a very unequal relationship with, berate you like this.
He is the dickrider I’m talking about. Being contrarian for their beloved Linus.
Me saying one derisive word on an online forum is not exactly the same as a business environment where your for the lack of a better word boss is publicly cussing you out and humiliating you. There are a million other ways to get the point across without being an ass about it.
Well, he isn’t anyone’s boss here. I agree, and so would linus nowadays, that this is toxic and should be avoided, but the anger I fully understand.
Attempting to shift blame away from yourself after making a change which breaks a large portion of user space is cause for termination at any company I’ve worked at. It’s cowardice. This action goes against one of the most important, core philosophies, of the kernal. Do not break userspace. Also, this person should know better. They are not some odd newbie who may not grasp the ideas yet.
In a world where termination is not an option harsh criticism is required. This though, I agree, was anger driven unprofessionalism
I think there may also be a cultural angle here. Anglo-Saxon culture really places a much higher emphasis on “not causing offense”, whereas other cultures place a higher emphasis on speaking truthfully, even if harshly.
So Linus, who grew up in Finland, may have thought of his message as harsh but fair, whereas to native English speakers it comes across as incredibly rude.
It doesn’t come across as particularly rude given what the offense here is. Someone blamed other projects for their mistake after getting called out. That deserves harsh criticism.
I think you are talking about American ideals. Not ideals in the English speaking world. Nothing here is remotely toxic by British standards. Swearing isn’t a big deal here, people regularly call each other swear words as a sign of affection. If someone does something stupid you can say they are acting like an idiot and hopefully they will listen. If you didn’t they might not think you are serious.
I like that Linus is so strict on not breaking user space because this obviously aids with compatibility and it’s probably a big part of why rolling releases work.
But I sure hope Linus’ eventual successor won’t be toxic and…cringe. It’s hard to take someone serious when he’s raging this much.
I like that Linus is so strict on not breaking user space because this obviously aids with compatibility and it’s probably a big part of why rolling releases work.
I think kernel still has compatibility with paleolithic glibc enabled by default
I agree, it’s completely unacceptable to introduce a bug and then to instead of taking responsibility for introducing such a bug, you start pointing fingers at everybody else.
It’s like when a car hits a cyclist following all the rules and then tries to blame the cyclist for not following some made up rules that only exist in the drivers head “Cyclists should be on the SIDEWALK if they don’t wanna get hit!”
Not only were they wrong to hit them, they’re DOUBLE wrong for trying to blame them after the fact.
You’re agreeing with something I didn’t state. I’m not defending the idea of introducing bugs through bad code and then blaming others. I think the way Linus responded to that was the issue.
After I saw the car hit the cyclist, I rushed to his aid.
The driver came out of the car, yelling at the cyclist for being on the street.
“Shut the fuck up. Get back in your car. You are the problem. It was wrong of you to hit him and wrong of you to blame him you fucking idiot. You can help, or you can fuck off, but you’re not going to stand here and blame the man you just injured with your own incompetence”, I screamed at the driver.
I don’t think I am missing the forest. There’s not an issue with the idea of correcting a developer, but there is an issue in the way the correction was carried out. Just because something behaves “better” after punishment doesn’t mean the punishment was good. Ends justifying means and all.
That’s very “ends justify the means” of you. No, that’s not the question here. Linus could have gotten the same results without the yelling and insults. You do not need either of those to be direct, assertive, and clear on what the issue is, something that Linus has since learned
Both Mauro and Linus are human. I trust them to be so. I don’t get the point of endlessly pontificating about human quirks & behavior, we are all not assembled from the same factory. And we all grow and we learn. No one’s perfect.
Plus, your argument fails to address the main issue here, Mauro needing to realize that he needs to improve in order to continue contributing to a project shared among many people and one passionately guarded by Linus as his baby.
Nah it’s completely fine. I vastly prefer an angry-sounding takedown over a passive aggressive takedown and a takedown Mauro definitely deserved because his code was, in fact, utter shite, and that as a maintainer. This isn’t “oh he’s a noob he doesn’t know how the kernel works” type of territory. Also note that this happened after he had been told what’s up in a neutral and factual way: Linus, even in his most management by perkele days, never made those things the first reply to anything. So Mauro got his chance to spot that he fucked up and correct his approach, he didn’t, therefore, it has to be said loudly. Simple as that.
Also, no “you should be aborted retroactively” in sight anywhere. Yeah that stuff wasn’t necessary even though everyone with an ounce of social intelligence should readily spot that those insults were always so over the top as to be obviously humorous.
It’s possible to be assertive and assign responsibility for a screwup without being a dick. “Being a dick” is the nothing else has worked option, not step one.
“being a dick” and “assertive” are weasel terms which do a hell a lot of lifting in your argument there. I have no idea where your line for behaviour to be deemed acceptable actually is.
IMO, no, Linus wasn’t a dick. He called out a specific attitude and behaviour which Mauro is not supposed to show in his role as maintainer. What about Mauro being a dick because he went in all self-righteous like “this is a bug in pulseaudio”?
If you were a restaurant manager, and a server told a customer that he’s not going to serve beer with steak but only wine because “drinking beer with steak is obviously wrong”, what would you do? Chew them out, of course. It’s way out of line. This isn’t Linus exploding over nothing just to bully someone, that’s a thing he has never done.
If you want someone toxic to complain about in the FOSS space pick Lennart Poettering, the kind of guy who replies to “We’d like to be able to disable various features to keep things small” with “why do you hate disabled people they need accessibility”. More generally speaking: Focussing on tone never ends up well. You can be incredibly toxic in the most flowery of idioms.
Your example is from one of this industries notorious for being toxic – that doesn’t make it right.
“Why would you think that’s even remotely acceptable? Now I have to go apologize and possible comp a meal.” Depending on the circumstance: take them off that table, send them home, or fire them. Being in control of themselves is one of the defining aspects of leadership, and being abusive is the sign a “leader” that isn’t.
If they start being a dick: sure, game on – so long as you’re not demeaning yourself doing it. But most people are capable of a degree of self reflection and accountability once you make the situation clear to them, and they deserve that chance. Sometimes people don’t even realize they’re the ones that screwed up, even when it’s obvious to everyone else.
There’s it again. What, precisely, is it that makes Linus’ comment “abusive”? Is he gaslighting? Is he attacking Mauro over what he is? All I see is calling out, harshly, what Mauro did, behaviour that actually occurred and that is not acceptable and that Mauro knows is not acceptable. “We do not break userspace” is the rule #1 of Linux development, Mauro ignored it and was a dick about it.
Or do you disagree with the tone of the whole thing. Things like “Shut up” instead of “This is not up for discussion”. If so, then please for the love of the gods please shut up.
Maybe fair in a typical setting, but getting iffy around programmers, especially kernel maintainers. I’m convinced linux and foss in general would not exist without the autism spectrum, and who knows maybe even borderline personality disorders
I think whoever recieved this would be completely fine to report Linus to HR or something. The fact somebody thought to circulate it is suggestive that it crossed a line. I do appreciate he does seem to really care about the kernel. He could maybe tone down the hysterics a little.
I think if there’s a lesson here its “Never hit send while you’re angry” always wait until your hormones to subside before sending an email because emails are records and people don’t have good judgement while angry, so an email sent in anger is just a record of your poor judgement.
Does the Linux Foundation even have HR? Even if they did, does an employee of a separate company even have the ability to make a complaint about Linus with them?
For the first part, no clue, but for the second, absolutely
Just because you work for someone else doesn’t give them the right to treat you badly and that sort of behavior can and should be reported to a person’s employer.
I think whoever recieved this would be completely fine to report Linus to HR or something.
As unnecessary as the tone was, if your first reaction to such a form of address is to run to HR, you’re contributing to a toxic workplace. The first and foremost way to address etiquette problems (I am not including criminal behavior in this) is to talk directly to the person who offended you. Everyone has a bad day once in a while, and some people may even shout. If the first reaction is to get them into legal trouble with the employer, most people will rightfully avoid you like you just stepped into dogshit.
If this kind of behavior - despite having addressed it face to face - keeps occurring, that’s a different issue, then HR may be necessary.
An individual misbehaving does not constitute a toxic workplace. If you can’t tell people that you think their tone is inappropriate, then take it to your manager, but going straight to HR is about the dumbest way to deal with this. Some people don’t even realize they overstepped but might be able to empathize once informed.
Oh yeah, when your boss has anger issues and curses you in email, you really want to politely talk to him and ask him to stop. That will show them that you’re a little spineless sucker and can be shat on indefinitely.
Yes, even to your boss you can say that you feel something could have been communicated in a more friendly way. “Anger issues” implies the repeated occurrence for which I already stated before that is a different situation.
The term is “hostile work environment”. HR doesn’t just respond because of strict liability. Just one occurance of something like this can lead to an otherwise solid worker to spiral from discomfort of the situation, both feeling like a prisoner at their job and producing far less value for their employers.
The latter is why HR cares, but the former is why it’s OKay to go straight to HR. If HR is well-trained, things like this shouldn’t escalate just because you went to HR. They should be able to diffuse it productively.
You have obviously never dealt with a real-world scenario. Going straight to HR for someone being verbally(!) out of line, without even using insults, means you are the bigger problem.
Actually, I’ve watched two GREAT workers and good people end up losing their jobs because a easily resolved situation turned toxic. The person who felt uncomfortable tried to take care of it 1-on-1 but had too passive aggressive a nature to really be clear when she confronted the guy.
So 6 months or a year later, she was on the verge of quitting and went to HR. He was terminated because it had gone too far. She left soon after because she still wasn’t comfortable at work after the cause of that ended.
…look. I “obviously never dealt” with anything because nobody is allowed differing opinions here, but I have 20+ years experience at businesses where the existence or lack of good HR has been a deciding factor of the work-culture and comfort level of team members. I work 1-on-1 with my company’s Directors of HR on a regular basis to make sure my team is happy and because I am involved with other teams at my job who have their own interpersonal conflicts. One of HR’s responsibilities in a good company is to involve themselves in interpersonal conflicts BEFORE decisive action has to be taken.
The problem is that face-to-face confrontations without a mediator don’t always end well. And I would rather not have HR decide “we have to fire our Rockstar senior dev or this random guy”. But if you address it earlier, HR deals with it earlier (yes, because the paper trail m eans HR can’t just fire “this random guy” later over the Rockstar senior dev). It’s win-win for all parties INCLUDING the Linus Torvalds in this explanation.
But I’ve “obviously never dealt with a real-world scenario” and my experience doesn’t count. So you can ignore everything I said.
You are under the very relevant misassumption that HR is less likely to be handling a situation inappropriately than two people speaking with each other directly. I stand by my original comment. A simple verbal overstep, on the first occurrence, should definitely be addressed without involving HR
Hard disagree. This letter is what happens when direct communications have failed.
Realistically, somebody near Linus probably told him to chill out and that he’s damaging his own reputation and his project’s by sending out this temper tantrum bullshit. In no world would the target of this letter be the person who successfully sits him down and lectures him on not being an asshole.
But honestly if he had a habit of sending out this kind of stuff it would be a liability/legal problem.
This is far from the first (or last) time he wrote something like this. This was just a regular thing in the kernel world for a long time (until Linus matured a little).
Whether or not it was a good thing is up for debate I think. Yeah, it’s very rude and unprofessional (and discourages new contributors who don’t want to risk getting chewed out), but considering the importance of the Linux kernel, it’s good to know the lead maintainer is doing too much of the right thing than not enough (i.e. being lax with bad code in order to be respectful). I’m fine knowing that a few tech workers got their egos smashed if it gives me confidence that the code powering civilization is high quality.
It’s often clear to see that Linus hasn’t experienced the “and find out” part of what happens when you fuck around. I know that many of us techies aren’t the most confrontational types, but I’m surprised that no one has hit him yet.
I like the discussion this has generated around toxicity and professionalism, but I’m still very amused by the fact that he censored himself in the last line after not doing so for the rest of the message.
The 23rd is the day before Christmas. We celebrate the eve here in the Nordics. The 25th is the relaxing day after Christmas when you eat leftovers and do fuck all all day.
Actually one day before Christmas in Finland and other Nordic countries. I don’t know if Linus still celebrates Christmas like that, having resided in the US for a long time already, but the big celebration is here always the 24th of December, and 25th–26th is mostly just resting after it.
Damn that was probably very hard to read for Mauro. This is something you never want to receive as Mail in your job. On the other hand it is good that Linux priorities fixing the kernel instead of letting other developers fix your code.
Add comment