Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs [LWN.net]

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 18:20 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (14 responses)

It's a book. One can find useful advice there. I didn't see any justification for censoring the reference.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 18:23 UTC (Tue) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link] (1 responses)

Not asking for censorship. Just pointing out that I'm not fond of it. One could equally find valuable advice in the Qur'an; I wouldn't be wild about a technical article referencing that either.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 19:33 UTC (Wed) by brother_rat (subscriber, #1895) [Link]

Would you have the same problem if the quote appeared without a reference? The linked article on the Confused Deputy also happens to reference a biblical idea but is much less obvious about it.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 0:06 UTC (Wed) by ikm (guest, #493) [Link] (11 responses)

The reason is quite simple: it's a religious book. Religion, politics and sex are all sensitive flammable topics which should better be left aside. I wouldn't suggest an actual censorship, of course, just something to be aware of.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 10:00 UTC (Wed) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (10 responses)

Until very recently, I thought that the high level of education required to enjoy LWN would restrict the readership to reasonable people only. I mean people capable of reason; people with the ability to abstract a couple of harmless sentences away from the totally irrelevant religious book they are from.

I am afraid I have just been proved wrong. Political correctness seems to have infiltrated everything.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 11:04 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link]

You'd be surpised by the range of irrational beliefs held by otherwise well-educated people (mostly outside their real area of expertise, that is).

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 11:41 UTC (Wed) by ikm (guest, #493) [Link] (8 responses)

I think the word to use here is "selfish", not "unreasonable". Basically a selfish reader would argue that the author is better omit stuff that might rub that reader wrong, and would sound that concern of his. While there is some truth to it, there's also the desire of the author to write what he actually wants to the way he wants to. Most will agree that the latter is to take precedence, but the point is, maybe it is just easier sometimes to avoid any confrontation in the first place. Again, this is for the author alone to decide.

I would also add that "with the high level of education required to enjoy LWN" one could expect a somewhat elevated level of people who are opposed to religion. Of course most of them wouldn't care, but still, references to religious content would be frowned upon to some extent.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 14:55 UTC (Wed) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link] (2 responses)

You're right; sorry about that. I shouldn't be paying for a service that "might rub me the wrong way".

It's been great guys. See ya.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 23:52 UTC (Wed) by ikm (guest, #493) [Link]

I didn't mean to judge anyone, and especially you. For the record, I didn't particularly enjoy that biblical reference as well, so I do support you on this one. But lwn is a nice place, so why not leave people to believe what they want and quote what they want? We all have our differences. It would mean a lot to me if you would try to rethink your decision.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 30, 2010 16:58 UTC (Tue) by jone (guest, #62596) [Link]

'I shouldn't be paying for a service that "might rub me the wrong way".'

yeah .. that's why i don't pay my taxes either :)

but seriously .. i'm guessing it's understandable that some might be overly sensitive particularly if you've been thwacked too often or abused with out of context biblical references .. in a similar vein - i'm guessing that any sort of "open kimono" or "money shot" references might be equally offensive to people who may have been sexually abused

perhaps an entropy analogy would be more appropriate here since it's generally benign and science is generally the more widely accepted school of religious thought that nobody will complain too much about

(let's see if i've covered all the bases .. government/politics - check .. religion -check .. sex - check .. ok - my work here is done)

elevated ?

Posted Nov 24, 2010 15:02 UTC (Wed) by copsewood (subscriber, #199) [Link] (2 responses)

"one could expect a somewhat elevated level of people who are opposed to religion"

Oh dear. Please reread that sentence slowly and try to consider how it might seem, to someone who doesn't agree with you, for you to claim superiority on that account. It might surprise you that Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Christians, Atheists, Sikhs, Agnostics and others can be found at any point on the scale of learning from illiterate to professorial.

As to the quote of timeless ancient wisdom within the article, I found it amusing, agreeable, appropriate and illuminating. Appropriate because those who won't learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat these. It could of course be equally appropriate for Bertrand Russell or Karl Marx to be quoted in a well-thought out article in LWN regardless of the fact that these significant thinkers were atheists.

elevated ?

Posted Nov 24, 2010 17:10 UTC (Wed) by ikm (guest, #493) [Link]

Sorry, I didn't mean to insult anyone. I won't go on to describe just why I think it is elevated, let's just leave it as a opinion of mine. As for how it might seem to others -- you are right, I have mentioned there would be no good coming from discussing that.

I also won't participate in this anymore; clearly, this discussion IS the road to destruction no matter how you go about it.

elevated ?

Posted Nov 26, 2010 23:16 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

It might surprise you that Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Christians, Atheists, Sikhs, Agnostics and others can be found at any point on the scale of learning from illiterate to professorial.

For my part, I don't claim educated people are superior to uneducated or that religious people are inferior to nonreligious, and I don't even know what "elevated" means as a quality of a person, but let me say that in spite of the diversity you point out, I'm willing to bet there is a strong negative correlation between education and religiousness.

I haven't seen any study of this, and I think one challenge in reporting such would be measuring "religious." I do believe a lot of people who describe themselves as religious aren't really. E.g. in choosing between medical treatments, one based on scientific conclusions and the other based on teaching of clergy, many such people would easily choose the former.

Tying back to the issue with the article, I doubt the author expected us to believe religiously that the road to destruction is wide, but rather to consider from our own educations whether it's true.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 20:07 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (1 responses)

you religion is that all 'Religions' are invalid and only held by uneducated people, thus any reference to anything Religious should not exist.

you seek to impose your Religion on everyone else by preventing anyone else from even mentioning their Religion, or anything related to it.

you can't do the English language without the KJV

Posted Nov 24, 2010 20:18 UTC (Wed) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link]

"I have stolen more quotes and thoughts and purely elegant little starbursts of writing from the Book of Revelation than anything else in the English language--and it is not because I am a biblical scholar, or because of any religious faith, but because I love the wild power of the language and the purity of the madness that governs it and makes it music." -- Dr. Hunter S. Thompson (also, Rev. 22:18-19: the first "noderivs" license?)

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 19:55 UTC (Tue) by JamesErik (subscriber, #17417) [Link] (13 responses)

I do. 'Tis a good article all around.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 19:58 UTC (Tue) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link] (12 responses)

Make sure to bring up Autotools in the middle of your pastor's next sermon, then.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 21:09 UTC (Tue) by stijn (subscriber, #570) [Link] (8 responses)

The bible has had, among other things, huge impact on our use of language, on literature, on phrases, sayings, ideas, plots, and shift @list. Contrast this with the automake manual at your leisure. The reference in the fine article seems apt enough, and there is absolutely nothing that suggests disrespect, I would say quite the contrary. Sermons can in fact be wide ranging and include comments on or quote from aspects of modern day life. Your discontent is puzzling.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 21:18 UTC (Tue) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link] (7 responses)

My discontent is merely that the bible is irrelevant to the discussion. There are plenty of other literary examples of the concept portrayed. The bible (at least the version commonly cited today) depicts murder, genocide, torture, and plenty of other vile topics that don't pertain to technical topics.

I suggested the commenter bring up Automake during the next sermon that his or her pastor delivers because it bares the same relevancy. One could discuss the fact that Automake is archaic, filled with ancient lore, long-dead language, and even relates to Creation itself. That doesn't make it appropriate to bring up in church (where the audience to such a discussion wouldn't care for it), just as bringing up the bible in a technical article about technical topics is jarring and bewildering.

I have no ire for Christians, or their beliefs. I simply don't care to be reminded of that particular spectrum of humanity when I am reading about Linux.

Still puzzled?

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 21:33 UTC (Tue) by stijn (subscriber, #570) [Link]

I had assumed you came from the other side of the fence. I see a little more logic to your position now, but I am still mildly puzzled (in the other direction now, it is a pleasingly swaying sensation). The bible is an ancient book, a cauldron of many things, among which it having shaped some of our language and sayings. It is in fact much more than the holy book of christianity. To conclude with something completely (un)related, I've always thought that Richard Feynman was very lucid when commenting on both science and religion.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 22:09 UTC (Tue) by Simetrical (guest, #53439) [Link] (4 responses)

Shakespeare's works include murder, racism, sexism, and plenty of vile topics (many of which, indeed, can be linked to Christianity) that don't pertain to technical topics. Would you have objected to a Shakespeare quote?

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 22:31 UTC (Tue) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link] (3 responses)

To be clear, I'm not "objecting". To object would imply that I'd like the article to be censored, which isn't the case.

What I reacted to was referencing material that was simultaneously irrelevant and offensive to some (I'd wager many, in fact, but "some" is irrefutable)... while adding essentially no value to the article itself.

As an example, I don't understand why a piece of work that glorifies the genital mutilation of infants would be chosen to "clarify" why the setuid bit is a high-maintenance design. In fact, I can see clearly and totally without the biblical reference why it is a design that is difficult to maintain and develop around. I can understand the motivation behind its original design, and the frustration and confusion it causes today. All without being reminded that approximately 6,000 boys born each day in the US have their penis mutilated due mainly to a precedent set 4,000 years ago and perpetuated today mostly out of family indoctrination and brainwashing.

It's largely irrelevant, I suppose; my comment won't make any difference in the mind of the editor or author. Clearly my bias clashes with theirs. I simply wanted to make it known that, contrary to popular opinion, a biblical reference is not universally accepted as relevant, friendly, or innocent.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 6:37 UTC (Wed) by nicooo (guest, #69134) [Link]

Why are you reading an article about an operating system named after genital mutilation?

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 13:11 UTC (Wed) by jackb (guest, #41909) [Link]

John Harvey Kellogg was also a proponent of circumcision so when you go to the grocery store do you protest the fact that they stock Corn Flakes?

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 21:18 UTC (Wed) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]

Remind me to never invite you to any parties.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 22:58 UTC (Tue) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]

> There are plenty of other literary examples of the concept portrayed.

I would certainly be interested in any you could suggest. I tried to think of others and the closest I came was Douglas Adams' quip about underestimating the ingenuity of fools - it is in the right sort of direction but has entirely the wrong emphasis.

(Not that I think the bible is either more or less appropriate in a technical article than Dickens or Adams, but I'm keen to broaden my horizons and would love to hear any references you have in mind).

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 21:26 UTC (Tue) by JamesErik (subscriber, #17417) [Link] (2 responses)

I'm not sure why a non-programmer of any stripe would care about Autotools, but I expect that many programmers care about fundamental truths of human nature. After all, it's easy and commonplace to: be up to one's eyeballs in debt, surrender liberty for security, use Windows, etc. It's often a long time before one figures out that the easy road was the road to destruction.

Neil makes a good case that this fundamental truth is applicable to the domain of Operating System design. A pat on the back to Neil. And yes I did want to make clear to Our Editor, in light of your post, that indeed someone from the readership liked and appreciated the reference.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 21:31 UTC (Tue) by ironiridis (guest, #60586) [Link]

I'm certainly not interested in an arms race here, but if it mattered to me as much as it seems to matter to you, I'd just end my paid subscription.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 0:15 UTC (Wed) by ikm (guest, #493) [Link]

> it's easy and commonplace to: be up to one's eyeballs in debt, surrender liberty for security, use Windows,

participate on lwn.net flames...

> It's often a long time before one figures out that the easy road was the road to destruction.

Indeed it is!

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 23, 2010 20:29 UTC (Tue) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]

What's wrong with quoting some of the world's earliest science fiction? :)

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 4:25 UTC (Wed) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (2 responses)

Now you know what it feels like to be bigot.

It's easy and convenient, isn't it?

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 13:58 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (1 responses)

This kind of comment doesn't help either, though. I'd really like to see a bit less name-calling on LWN...can we try for that, please?

Thanks.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 25, 2010 19:31 UTC (Thu) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link]

My apologies. I'll resist in the future.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 14:34 UTC (Wed) by __alex (guest, #38036) [Link] (1 responses)

Given the author's publicly known religious beliefs it does seem a bit more like preaching than just a casually borrowed allegory. I hope that overtly religious meandering in editorial doesn't become a regular feature on LWN.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 24, 2010 15:22 UTC (Wed) by JamesErik (subscriber, #17417) [Link]

I for one had never heard of the author, much less known about his beliefs. The man is nowhere even close to preaching here: the allegory is apt and doesn't even *mention* any deity for cryin' out loud! There's no "overtly religious meandering" anywhere within 100 miles of this article.

Author: Again, an excellent technical article, with *several* good, insightful citations. Thanks!

Editor: I never fail to get my money's worth from my subscription. You do a great job. Thanks!

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Nov 29, 2010 9:50 UTC (Mon) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link] (1 responses)

I don't particularly love your objection. The truth of the Bible is a subject of your personal belief system, but irrespective of that, the book remains an important literary work and part of the Western canon. Referencing it is certainly fair game. But, what has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Dec 3, 2010 2:31 UTC (Fri) by rlhamil (guest, #6472) [Link]

> But, what has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there
> is nothing new under the sun.

Amazing how nobody complained yet that Ec1:9 (NIV, I think) was rotting their brain!

Ghosts of Unix past, part 4: High-maintenance designs

Posted Dec 2, 2010 21:49 UTC (Thu) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

I don't particularly love the reference to the bible.

That was my favorite part. :)

I really like computer science, photography and music, but I just looove the Bible!