Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment I think that cookie-cutter approaches are useless, (Score 1) 578

not just for the question of how a contributor should be treated, but also for the question of how a leader should act.

If a leader is able to get world-beating results by being an asshole, then so be it. That leader has beaten the world, and I am not going to quibble with success. If a leader is an asshole and subpar output is the result, then by all means, tell them to treat their team differently.

Team dynamics are a complicated thing. You just don't fuck with a winning team. If they are using four letter words all the time and sacrificing live chickens at midnight, but the results are running circles around everyone else, I for one do not want them to stop, even if it would save a chicken's life.

At the same time, if they are doing all of these things and the results are uneven or poor, then by all means, change the behavior.

In this case, I'd say that the results of Linux kernel development speak for themselves. And if you just don't belong in the culture, then go somewhere else. If the culture starts to be counterproductive, give the world a great, big "I told you so!" and collect your profits on the book deal. But otherwise, to expect people to fuck up a successful operation for your feelings, for manners, or for high-minded ethics concerns is just bad juju. It's not lawyering or doctoring, ethical concerns are not front and center. It's software. The goal is that it works and works well, and in fact that's the highest ethical aspiration *of* software, given the many critical ways in which it gets used in today's world.

The value to the users is first. The comfort of the developers is second. If the culture and development process are working well, get the hell out of the way if you don't like them. As this person has done. So—problem solved.

Comment Re:Issue is more complicated (Score 1) 578

To be fair, this issue really has almost nothing to do with Linux on the desktop. This is about the kernel mailing list. The kernel has been used successfully on Linux desktop systems for over 15 years now; it's really not holding anything up there. Most of it is a solved problem. There's some interesting work still going on there to be sure, but most of it is either for servers/high-performance computing or for embedded systems, not for standard desktops. There's nothing that can be done in the kernel that will magically make Linux a much more attractive option for the desktop.

Almost all the stuff that could be done to improve the desktop experience is in userspace, which by definition doesn't have anything to do with LKML: things like init systems, desktop environments, application software, distributions, etc. The main exception is graphics drivers, but even that isn't really a LKML topic, those things (like Nouveau) are pretty big projects by themselves and aren't conducted on the LKML. And of course, it should be obvious that the biggest impediment to Linux on the desktop isn't really technical at all, it's the availability of application software (though I suppose you could argue that improving WINE would make a big difference here).

Anyway, the point is, this issue is about only one part of the whole FOSS/Linux community; other projects don't have this notoriety.

Comment Re:Tech circles vs slashdot (Score 1) 240

Guns are an exception. And Liberals don't really oppose guns, they just oppose commoners having them. They are all for guns when it suits them (police, military, elites with body guards etc.

Here's the deal, I'll give up my guns just as soon as the government gives up theirs. Not a moment before.

Comment Re:Tech circles vs slashdot (Score 2) 240

slashdot is overwhelmingly conservative.

If anything Slashdot is Libertarian. Pro Liberal social policies, pro conservative fiscal policies, with a fair amount of independent thought.

But I could understand liberals thinking /. is conservative, and conservatives seeing it more liberal.

But case in point, there are both liberals and conservatives that both support or reject it. Bernie Sanders isn't really conservative, but opposes TPP vehemently. As does Trump. Strange bed fellows indeed.

Comment Re:Tech circles vs slashdot (Score 4, Informative) 240

Sorry, I don't oppose TTP because of Obama. I oppose it because it is a secret deal, pre approved by the powers that be, and enough (D) and (R) supported it to make it bi-partisan. If you support it, not knowing anything other than it was "Obama says it will be good" then you are the real fool. I bet you'd oppose it if GWB supported it (all other things considered).

The fact is, the whole (D) good (R) bad (Or visa versa) is really getting old. And do not pretend the (D) don't do the very same thing. Blindly following your party is for Sheeple.

Comment Re: America (Score 1) 388

No, I want them to already have values which align with my own.

What you're advocating is a politician who's corrupt and votes for legislation that's against my own interests (like the DMCA, Iraq War, etc.), and then only changes course somewhat after he/she finds out that position is too unpopular, so they change their rhetoric somewhat to try to appeal to the voters and keep getting re-elected. Meanwhile, the shitty legislation has already been passed, and they're not doing anything to repeal it.

The point of a democracy isn't to elect someone who will do the bare minimum to get re-elected, while passing as much stuff as they can for their corporate benefactors without pissing off their constituents too much. The point of a representative democracy is to elect candidates who share your own values, so that they can spend their time studying the issues in-depth and making sound decisions on them, because they may come up with a different decision after studying the issue for weeks or months than you would after reading some slanted "news" article for 1 minute.

Comment Re:Western World Projects are becoming embarrasing (Score 1) 178

It's simple: Western society is collapsing. It's too bad, too; we're finally figuring out a few things like equal rights for gays and ending prohibition for pot, the former marginalizing a significant portion of society (reducing productivity) and the latter costing society a fortune in money and violence (just like alcohol Prohibition did in the 1930s).

But I guess all the corruption, plus all the outsourcing to low-cost nations, plus all the lawsuits, is catching up with us.

Comment Re:I see the problem (Score 1) 319

No, it's not about being "Christian", dominionists are a particular strain that wants Christians to have dominion over everyone, hence the name.

It's just like how only some Christians believe in Prosperity Theology ("God loves rich people more, and that's why he's blessed them with wealth." Dominionists are closely related), and only some Christians believe in speaking in tongues. Christians aren't all the same.

As for Cruz's claims, obviously he keeps that quiet. His father spells it all out.

You will lose an important tape file.