It's because it's a genuinely better way to manage system services.

It's faster. It has explicit dependencies which enables parallelism. It integrates cgroups natively.

It unifies service configuration language. This is the thing that many people say they hate about it. Rather than any executable being able to do whatever it wants there's a model for how to describe your service and the things it will execute.

The biggest problem with it is that it's not seamlessly compatible with existing init scripts. If you don't have any existing custom init scripts, then this doesn't matter. In my life I've only written a few custom init scripts, and in almost every single one of them I went looking for something like libdaemon to help me simplify certain steps. systemd integrates all of that stuff and puts it into one manual.

Ultimately the people that hate systemd for legitimate rather than cargo-cult reasons it's because they didn't feel like they needed all of the extra features and functionality that systemd offered, so the cost of migrating seemed like a waste of time to them.

I've recently had to make unit files for systemd and, compared to my experience doing init scripts to cover the same workload about five years ago, it has been an amazing experience. I have no interest in going back to the old way.

As more of the details have come out I've grown sadder and sadder that I ever gave RMS a pass on his behavior. Seeing this community jump to his defense without intelligent consideration makes me wonder why I ever wanted to be a part of it.

Typescript is essentially the same implementation of static typing that Python landed on. It's static duck-typing and inference.

I've started going less and less as I can't find what I'm looking for. These days it always looks under-stocked.

Firefox and Chrome already do the "make a page look like an app" thing. I don't understand why this is being touted as a unique or new feature.

Blockchain could probably be an effective way to allow the electorate to verify that their results were tallied correctly. Imagine each vote is added to a closed blockchain that's merged internally. Once the results are tallied the chain used for the tally is moved from air-gapped systems to the public internet. Once that happens the results are essentially fixed. The voters could have been given their key in the chain to check that it exists.

Using any of this to actually cast the votes is a terrible idea. We need a more strict consensus algorithm and chain of custody to handle that part.

Fundamentally the term "open source" was coined to try to take away the political meaning. Free software has always been political. I suspect this distinction is playing out in these debates too.

TFA: "What can you do?

I made a joke in the title of this post about weaponizing empathy. I'm not sure that's even possible. But you can start by having clear community guidelines, teaching your community to close the door on overt hate, and watching out for any overall empathy erosion caused by the six dark community behavior patterns I outlined above."

I got pulled back into Firefox by the Developer Edition. I wasn't sold on Pocket at first, but so far it's turn out to be great for me. Easy to ignore when I don't care, but every time I've looked at it there have been good suggestions that I actually wanted to read.

I think the people screaming about how Mozilla needs to get back to just making a browser completely misunderstand Mozilla. The Firefox era was probably the only one where they did anything close to just making a browser. In the early days Seamonkey *was* Mozilla. It was a full suite of things. They were build XUL and XpCom and all of this as a platform with a strong html rendering engine as the backing for it all. I'm sorry that so many of you were confused by the breakout success of Firefox, but the organization has never been so narrowly defined.

I thought that ss was silly until I actually needed its extended features. There's no way to add that stuff to the output of netstat without breaking everybody that depends on netstat. I still find myself writing `netstat -lanp` out of habit, but when I see that the queue sizes are missing I remember and do something like `ss -tanp` instead. This is definitely one of those cases where you're blind to what you're missing until you play around with it.

If a single person decided to enforce this code of conduct by divine decree without encoding the standard for others to read you would be entirely okay with that? Let's say this person decides to kick you out because they think you're an asshole. Would you just accept that silently or demand to know the standard by which you were judged an asshole

The "kick them off if they're an asshole" standard is no more resilient to this.

Again, the "kick them off if they're an asshole" standard doesn't do anything to avoid this negative consequence. You seem to be complaining about the fact that others are allowed to decide whether you're being disrespectful or derogatory even if you don't believe you were. This is the exact same way the word asshole is applied. We decide whether you're an asshole with no need to consider your intent.

That argument didn't involve a code of conduct and was unproductive due to trolling and bad moderator tools. It doesn't really pertain to this because there was no way for anybody to decide the standard.

I'm really glad they did this. Reading the other comments it's super obvious that a lot of programmers have absolutely no idea of what others consider the required civility and etiquette for online discourse. Giving such a specific list, at the very least, makes it clear to those people that they are acting way outside of community standards. For the majority of this list if anybody was doing that then they are toxic and trash people that were probably dragging your community down anyway. Bravo on giving a procedure and definition to follow so that they can shape up or get shipped out.

As an aside to everybody that's mad about this Code of Conduct, are you really this terrible to people in your developer communities?

I'm not sure why there isn't a PKI system for this like with ssh or other open source projects. Once you've established the trust it would then warn you if it was signed with a different key. It's shocking that this most basic warning system doesn't exist.

If there's a way to recover the device, then it's not bricked. Picking the previous image in grub, while annoying, is a pretty simple workaround.