Weekly Edition
Return to the Kernel page
| |||||||||||
Quotes of the week
Open source is rapid at progressing towards common goals ... it's
when the goals aren't common that progress gets bogged down.
-- James Bottomley
If we put stuff in sysfs then people WILL use it and we WILL need
to support it for ever. Pointing at some document and saying "call
my lawyer" just won't cut it. sysfs is part of the kernel ABI. We
should design our interfaces there as carefully as we design any
others.
-- Andrew Morton
I hope that nothing I ever say holds back our developers or
community from doing what is right. I did not realize that the GNU
and Linux kernel hackers were such dutiful slaves.
-- Theo de Raadt(Log in to post comments)
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 2, 2008 20:43 UTC (Wed) by lamby (subscriber, #42621) [Link] The Theo de Raadt post gets even better later on (if you have the stomach for that sort of thing).
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 2, 2008 22:01 UTC (Wed) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link] I have to agree with him on his main point; NDAs = bad Shame the Linux Driver Project is perpetuating this situation, although it is unclear to me what kind of NDAs they are signing. Hopefully as time goes by they will be less common.
LDP's goals Posted Jul 3, 2008 6:18 UTC (Thu) by alex (subscriber, #1355) [Link] You would have to ask the driver project yourself but IIRC the NDAs don't preclude writing well commented drivers. So while not having the datasheets and programming notes from the vendor I would suggest the BSD people could learn a fair amount by reading the drivers (although obviously not copying them). Having written more than a few drivers in my time I have to say I trust working code more than datasheets anyway.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 5, 2008 10:14 UTC (Sat) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link] I believe I read somewhere that the hardware manufacturers are more concerned about leaking of product specifications and features before the product lanch date. But I can't find a citation for that at the moment.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 5:24 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] Don't be too quick to criticise. People like Theo are exactly the kind of people who bring about change. Unfortunately, they're also exactly the kind of people who get kicked out of every group they join, because they can't stay in a clique for five minutes before calling it on its collective self-mythological bullshit. ...Which is probably why they end up out on their own, changing the world. ;)
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 10:44 UTC (Thu) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] Of course, heaven forbid you ever call them on their mythological bullshit, or even ask them to try and communicate without being openly insulting.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 11:55 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] > Of course, heaven forbid you ever call them on their mythological bullshit Is there ANY human who is actually good at detecting their own bullshit? As far as I can tell, the best any of us can hope for is "doesn't reject it out of hand when someone else points it out" and "admits up front that they may be full of it". > or even ask them to try and communicate without being openly insulting Is there a non-insulting way to say "you're full of shit"? In any case, clearly Theo CAN communicate without being insulting, otherwise he'd be a good deal more isolated than he is. If he does insult, then, one must assume it's by choice. On the other hand, if he cannot help but be insulting, can he truly be held responsible for it? Or should we (dis)regard his outbursts in the same way as the tics of someone with Tourette's Syndrome? (And if so, the comment to which I originally responded is actually pretty reprehensible...)
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 12:10 UTC (Thu) by bfields (subscriber, #19510) [Link] Is there a non-insulting way to say "you're full of shit"? Yes. You just explain why they're wrong.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 17:17 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] That doesn't exactly convey the same message, though, does it...?
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 19:58 UTC (Thu) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link] >You just explain why they're wrong. It is impossible to overcome a subjective comittment to a particular belief, not technically, not politically, not religiously. You can't have a robust, non-monoculture FOSS ecosystem without the constellation of major and minor "heads" that talk. Theo's batting average for good ideas is enough to make him a keeper, if not exactly one to agree with regularly.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 14:50 UTC (Thu) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] I didn't complain that he was poor at detecting his own bullshit; rather that if he was accused of being a "dutiful slave", in every bit as fair a manner as he used the phrase, he would respond with hostility and rudeness. There's never a reason to say "you're full of shit"; communication 101, you focus on the issues, not the person, when you're actually trying to communicate with them.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 17:24 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link]
Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't, and maybe he would at first but would realise, on reflection, that the reaction is justified. Moreover, maybe he only made the accusation because his expectations were no higher than that anyway.
I think there we must agree to disagree. However, if one does tell a person that they're full of shit, it isn't likely that one is trying to communicate with that person any longer.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 17:28 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] (sorry, for "the reaction is justified" read "the accusation was justified")
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 3, 2008 18:03 UTC (Thu) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] Can you give one link where Theo de Raadt admitted he was wrong? Especially right after it was pointed out to him? I won't argue that there are perhaps some times to dismiss someone as full of shit. But Theo doesn't do that; he'll call them full of shit, and continues to try and argue over the subject. And one of my big concerns here is that the more we treat his insults and rants as having value, the more we implicitly show newbies that this is an acceptable way to act, and the more people who don't want to deal with that crap just leave.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 4, 2008 10:51 UTC (Fri) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] My concern is that many people are insufficiently able to distinguish between his insults and rants and the person himself. A lot of people, some of them right here, are quite happy to write off anyone whose behaviour is divergent from majority standards as worthless or worse, regardless of their abilities and contributions. Theo is a case in point. There's anecdotal evidence to suggest that he has an ASD. My own personal suspicion is that either he lacks the insight to realise, or he hasn't reconciled himself to the fact, that by definition he isn't a "reasonable person", as society sees that - that what he sees as a normal form of communication will likely alienate anyone who doesn't, and a few of us who do (myself included; I can be a thoroughgoing arse, and whilst I try to suppress that side of me unless I trip over someone are being arses themselves, I know even that is never helpful). If his manner is a direct consequence of his neurological makeup, how on earth is sending him to Coventry or turning him into a figure of ridicule going to help? And then there's the very awkward fact of his contribution to the free software landscape; it can't be dismissed that without Theo's nature we'd never have had Theo's contributions. The same could be said of Dan Bernstein, for example, or Richard Stallman; it could also be extended outwards, to pretty much anyone whose mind somehow managed to develop without the ability to compromise. As for newbies, are they really going to turn away in droves because Theo's an arsehole? But they might turn away in droves when they realise that the vast majority of people out there are utterly incapable of distinguishing between the person and the work, that if they do stand on a point of principle, and especially if they make what turns out later to be a mistaken stand, nobody will ever let them forget it or take them seriously again. Frankly, it's what keeps me from contributing. I could live with Theo going off at me. I don't think I could cope with being Theo. I've observed in the past that one of the reasons I dislike contributing to online discussions these days is that I can't stand the way people treat each other. Strange as it may seem to you or anyone else, I'm not thinking of Theo or people like him when I say that.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 4, 2008 10:55 UTC (Fri) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] > alienate... a few of us who do, myself included > I could live with Theo going off at me Meh. I am large, I contain multitudes. And not a single proofreader among us.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 4, 2008 11:20 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] i.e., Theo is sufficiently consistent that it's plausible that he has no choice in acting the way he does? Of course, the question is to what degree we should take that into account. You have to expect *some* degree of understanding of the other party's position in any conversation or the interaction just won't work. (And I say this as someone who is constantly fighting an internal battle which if lost would lead to me being *more* annoying and unpleasant than Theo, but without the productivity to make up for it...)
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 4, 2008 19:21 UTC (Fri) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] "many people are insufficiently able to distinguish between his insults and rants and the person himself." So ... the solution is to avoid saying "Theo, you're full of shit"? If we're going to make standards for people to stand up to, I expect that everyone should have to stand up to these standards. "If they do stand on a point of principle, and especially if they make what turns out later to be a mistaken stand, nobody will ever let them forget it or take them seriously again." I don't see anyone doing that. In fact, I find that a total non sequitur. Theo doesn't have problems because of his principles; he has problems because he's a dick. Even if he is unable to change, responding negatively to his rudeness may discourage people who do have the capacity to choose between personal attacks and reasonable communication. Yes, in fact, newbies are being driven away. For one example, most women aren't brought up to work in highly aggressive environments, and won't volunteer for projects where their work is going to get rude, hostile comments, much less personal attacks.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 5, 2008 7:20 UTC (Sat) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] > Theo doesn't have problems because of his principles; he has problems because he's a dick. I think this discussion just swallowed its own tail.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 5, 2008 8:28 UTC (Sat) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] I fail completely to understand your standards for communication, but I perceive them as applying differently to Theo de Raadt and the rest of the world.
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 5, 2008 17:51 UTC (Sat) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link] ... er ... ?
Quotes of the week Posted Jul 11, 2008 1:28 UTC (Fri) by ketilmalde (guest, #18719) [Link] While Theo's prose is entertaining, I think a little brevity might help in getting the message across. Here's my translation: 1. The EEE PC uses closed components for ethernet and wifi. And documentation for networking components in general are lacking. 2. The FSF and the Linux hackers have not done anything that has resulted in getting hardware documented. Unlike OpenBSD, which has done more than all other free OS'es put together. As for 1, I'll take his word for it, but surely 2 is at least a slight exaggeration?
|
|||||||||||