Slashdot Mirror
BBC Interviews Linus Torvalds
chrisseaton writes "The BBC has an interview with Linus Torvalds. It's a little thin, but good to see something like this in a decent mainstream news source."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I felt that the article was not only about LINUX "growing up" but also that its founder has other things that are important. Nothing unusual but I think it makes nontechies feel more comfortable with Linus. Its nothing crazy or cultish. He even puts himself down a bit at the end.
The next time RMS rants about why he's not getting the attention that he should this link needs to be forwarded to him to show how it should be done.
BBC is the only mainstream outlet with the balls to cover linux in positive manner. CNN did feature few articles, but they never saw the light of day. It was dumbed down on few occasions and made sound like it was an indie/experimental OS. I hope that trend changes really quick, although I have my doubts that MSNBC will ever cover Linux developments in detail. Biased source.. you know the deal.
And from unrelated rants department, if I ever had the option to hang out with either Bill Gates or Linus Torvalds, I'd choose Gates.
I wish he was the prophet of linux community. He fits the nerd profile so well. It's heartbreaking that one of us is trying to destroy his kind of people.
In a perfect world, Bill Gates would fight Linus from the other side of the OS spectrum. Imagine how world would have been different if Gates didn't choose the dark side.
We can dream, can't we?
I think the idea of BBC snippets like this is that if you are an average reader, no knowldege of Linux or maybe computers in general, it gives you a brief characterisation on people you might have heard those silly IT guys talking about at work.
1 17 6/1/
All and all the bbc is a fairly good organisation with its respect to Linux and open software.
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
Not every interview has to be stellar material to be interesting to the market.
I for one am glad that Linus has chosen such a bold move and taken some time for himself. Linux is certainly not going to help raise his offspring, and it shouldn't be eating into his most important reason for living: his family.
The BBC has always held a good feeling in my heart too, for their very even handed coverage of world events.
An interview like this is trying to show the lighter, more human side of what was traidionally perceived as as the every geeks' "Geek God", and show that Linus can change, just like everyone who grows up to realize that life is more than about just computing.
There were some very real moments in the article, if you looked closely. Linus is moving away from the world he has helped create, and started down the path of another that is blossoming in his home. Good for him.
So go ahead, flame me for being sincere, and seeing the other side of Linus, I forgive you.
user@host$ diff
But seriously, the fact that Linus handles himself so well when talking to the 'normals' is a huge plus to the community. Thanks, Linus, keep up the good work.
why doesn't he use his popularity to raise some public money to fund projects? The Gov's will invite him and listen carefully.
Whose desktop?
On my desktop, it runs like a charm and I love it.
I didn't like Windows on my desktop, could that mean that Windows isn't perfectly suited either.
It's all a matter of definition. And don't start a "majority of users" speech before the "majority of users" have tried Linux.
If you start doing things because you hate others and want to screw them over the end result is bad.
There are many people here who are trying to be holier than the pope and prove in all ways that they are the true believeres and revolutionaries. And so they try to demonstrate their loyalty to "the cause" on every occasion by lamenting how this or that organization will bring the apocalypse and BillG is the antichrist. Hope this will calm them a bit.
When men used to be men
Yeah yeah, I think it's great that "Linux" just got some mainstream press exposure, but the more I see Linus Torvalds speak the more I despise him.
How is it that he rarely if ever mentions GNU's contribution to "Linux". Sorry folks but you need to all recognize that Linux is a kernel and not an operating system.
Also, let's all be real and admit that Linux would not be where it is today without the countless amazing free tools that GNU has provided.
Linus has the responsibility to say something about GNU, especially in a high profile interview such as this. I don't care if the interviewer is ignorant and doesn't know to ask anything about GNU.
Linus should be man enough to pay his respects where they are due. Now, thanks to this interview, the truth has been thwarted once more and GNU's vision of FREE (NOT as in beer) software is steadily going out the window.
Boy this makes me really look forward to the GNU kernel Hurd. I think Linux is about to go onto the long list of things I am boycotting out of principle.
"In a way it is fun. I'm pleased to be a poster boy. It gives me some self-importance." Linus, please give us a break. Let me go out back and cry for your under-appreciated ego.
Don't super-programmers aspire to anything greater than the shrine of the blasted machine?!
There's not really a way to say this without making people groan... moderators, do your worst:
The reason RMS carps endlessly about the GNU project deserving credit it, quite simply, that the FSF did most of the work that resulted in "Linux." Linus originally set out to write a Unix clone from scratch (a small hobbyist one, not "big and professional like gnu"), but for a variety of reasons the project scaled back to writing a kernel and a handful of userland kernel-glue (insmod, iptables, etc.), and "Linux" distributions are based on GNU userlands -- the C library, compiler toolchain, shell, basic Unix utilities, and desktop (if Gnome) are all GNU things. They make a fairly coherent whole, provide basic system services such as fopen() and ls, and define the user's interface with the computer (bash or Gnome) -- XFree86 and Linux (the kernel) are as essential as GNU is, but they're smaller and they do less to directly define the operation of the system.
The GNU/Linux beef is one thing (language is inaccurate; koala bears aren't really bears), but calling Linus "the inventor of the Linux operating system" is about like crediting NT to the team that wrote KERNEL32.DLL. RMS spent more than a decade of his life setting up an organization which still puts out voluminous Free code, and crippled himself with RSI writing code to give away, and I see high-modded posts here that treat him with more contempt than I've ever seen aimed at Jack Valenti or Fritz Hollings.
You've heard this all before, of course, and you're probably sick of it by now -- it's only the slow and plodding truth, and it has no punchline. Worst of all, it takes itself seriously, just like RMS. I really can't think of a short or funny way, though, to explain how wrong it is to shit on the guy who had the idea for the GPL, who argued with the world for years until the idea of open source software started to take hold, who at the time Linux was started had written a lot of the existing Free code personally, and who is directly responsible for the userland most of you supposedly use -- that's not RMS trying to grab credit for someone else's work, that's simply the way it happened, the truth.
Not funny, and not sexy like "Finnish teenager writes OS in basement; world stunned." But true.
The market is the market, and it responds to all the messages that are put out there. My point is not that RMS doesn't deserve the credit, a lot of credit. It's just that his personality works against him, and this is one of the ways that this happens. He's doing great work, and his initiative has taken off to the point that it has a life of its own. Arguing about who deserves what part of the credit is unseamly, whether or not you are stealing someone else's thunder. If credit is really that important to RMS, and is suspect it isn't, then he should take the feedback and adjust to it. Since he probably doesn't actually care that much about this kind of recognition, he should just bask in the glory of his accomplishments and keep being who he is. The mainstream will always be reluctant to fully accept an RMS type, but it doesn't matter because his fans know how it really is.
I think you're right, RMS really doesn't care about fame or recognition...he definitely does not seem the type to worry about stuff like that.
I seem to remember reading that the real reason RMS is so pedantic on the "GNU/Linux" thing is that he's afraid that Linux might slip away from the high ideals of Free Software to the amoral pragmatism of Open Source. This would be a real tragedy, if it occurred. However, I don't know how likely it is. I really can't imagine a non-GPL fork of the kernel.
Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
RMS is reaping the results of his own decisions. If he was concerned with public perception of the free software movement, he should have made more pragmatic decisions that would have yielded more favorable publicity, but he didn't.
He could have given his project a catchy and descriptive name that people would naturally associate with a movement about freedom. Instead he chose an obscure name like GNU that no one knows how to pronounce (or really wants to once they do).
He could have worked on writing a simple yet fully functional monolithic kernel, which would have been a quick way to finish the off a basic GNU system. Instead he chose a design so apparently complicated that it still is not usable even though they had a one-year head start on Linux!
He could have adopted Linux as part of the GNU system (after all, it's always been GPL even if FSF don't own the copyright). He could have pursued making Debian an official GNU distribution which would have given him the authority to call it a GNU system. However the FSF stopped funding Debian after November 1995.
He could have found some graceful way to seek credit for his contribution to Linux distributions. Instead he came up with the abomination known as "GNU/Linux" (pronounced guh-noo slash linux -- you're supposed to pronounce the slash!) He continually wonders why no one (except the Debian people) is interested in
perpetuating this offense against what little dignity is left in American English.
And now he's upset that he gets no credit, no recognition, no acknowledgement of his ideals in the mainstream media. Well he probably should be upset, but only at himself for his lack of pragmatism.