Linus Interviewed

a9db0 writes "There is a somewhat low-content interview with Linus here in the Seattle Times about his move to Portland. It does have a couple of Linus classic one-liners."

Comments

Low content? Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

...but I'm very happy doing it, and I feel I do something meaningful. What more can I ask for?

May we all realize this much some day.

Is there any way an AC can mod Linus + gajillion Insightful for that quote? If so, allow me.

Sounds like a great guy!

[SSonnentag]

Every time I read one of Linus' interviews I come away with the same impression...Linus sound like a really great guy! He sounds down-to-earth and practical. He doesn't sound greedy, manipulative or controlling. He sounds friendly and seems to have a great sense of humor. Basically, Linus sounds like a reverse image of Microsoft. Go Linu[s|x]!!!

Re:Proneenciation?

[MBCook]

I've heard it pronounced all three ways (lin-ux, leye-nux, lee-nux). Linus says he doesn't really care. But there is a soundbyte somewhere on the net (it used to be the test sound when you installed a soundcard under Linux) that was Linus saying "My name is Leenus Torvald and I pronouse Leenux... Leenux." (or something like that). So yes, in theory, it probably should be Lee-nux.

That said, people in the US have been brainwashed to pronouce the name "leye-nus" for over 50 years by the comic strip "Peanuts". I never knew there WAS any other way to pronouce that name until after I got into Linux and heard Linus pronounce his name.

I assume most Finnish people pronounce it the way he does.

It's just based on how you pronouce the name "Linus" by default.

Fixing fundamental design mistakes?

[crucini]

Q. How can Linux avoid the security problems that have affected Windows?
A. Better design and actually caring about them. Having the guts to really fixing fundamental design mistakes, rather than trying to work around them.

Some folks still think that *nix is inherently virus proof because anything a mere user runs couldn't touch the really important stuff in /bin. I think most Unix programmers understand by now that the really important stuff is under $HOME; what's under /bin is easily replaceable. There are many pathways for effective viruses on Linux - the biggest obstacle to viruses is the lack of standardization.

Maybe Linus is saying that as viruses start attacking Linux, he's willing to radically rethink permissions. GRsecurity and SElinux point in that direction, but wouldn't work for a normal user. Could there be a future Linux kernel that prevents an image library exploit from modifying your .bashrc?

Re:Fixing fundamental design mistakes?

[dustman]

Some folks still think that *nix is inherently virus proof because anything a mere user runs couldn't touch the really important stuff in /bin. I think most Unix programmers understand by now that the really important stuff is under $HOME; what's under /bin is easily replaceable.

I think you are dismissing things too easily. The fact that the stuff under /bin is easily replaceable is exactly what makes unix "inherently virus proof".

The stuff stored under $HOME is mostly data, not executable (except for scripts, which are easy to doublecheck). If I find out I have been hacked or virused, I just shrug, tar up /home, reinstall my stuff, and carefully restore /home. On a computer where I am the only user (a fair comparison, if it's one person's primary workstation), that will only take maybe an hour of my attention if I'm really paranoid about checking all the scripts.

Viruses aren't a problem because they can only hit stuff in /bin if there's a security problem (which are much rarer than the windows world), and even if they do, it's easy to restore /bin. They can hit $HOME, but by its nature $HOME is not a good target.

Re:Fixing fundamental design mistakes?

[Tony-A]

Maybe Linus is saying that as viruses start attacking Linux, he's willing to radically rethink

Correct at that point. It's not just permissions or any other one thing. When you have to react you try to get at the root of the problem as much as possible.

One advantage of Unix is that it is inherently multi-user. If it's just me on the computer, why should I be limited to just one identity? Seems I should be able to run a browser under its own identity and if it catches viruses and whatever, all it can mess up is itself. Adds a wee bit of a hassle in that I have an extra step anytime I want to lift something out of the browser, but has the distinct advantage that I'm in control, not the browser.

When Linux gets attacked, you get responses from several levels. You do not have to wait for official patches. If the official sources are still asleep you'll find something at least marginally effective on Slashdot. Some of the early stuff may do more damage than good, but in the heat of battle you are considerably better off if you can choose your own optimum in the space between "must do something now" and "best to wait for the official patch". The situation may resemble the Keystone Kops, but it is effective and there is a high probability that at the end something does actually get fixed instead of some kinda-sorta workaround.

Some folks still think that *nix is inherently virus proof
Technically, *nix is vulnerable, but there will be enough response and effective enough response that the malware won't get much of anywhere. A simple count of vulnerabilities is a poor indicator of the success of exploiting those vulnerabilities.

Re:I find this quote more interesting

[GreyWolf3000]

Your comparison is incorrect. The GPL prevents you from taking the code and leaving the community with it, not restricting your use while being "part of it."

Anti-GPL arguments tend to boil down to one issue--if the code were truly "free," then you ought to be able to do anything you want with it, including slipping the original authors a deuce and taking the code and making it proprietary.

The GPL isn't designed to protect the code, it's designed to protect the community that wrote the code.

Sadly, no.

[sfled]

I found the [Microsoft] "Getthe facts" [marketing] campaign pretty amusing, myself. I think people can make up their own minds about the facts.

This is a mistake that the talented and intelligent often make. Many people cannot make up their own minds about the facts. It's a bell-curve distribution; at one end are the people who have the intelligence and character to weigh the facts and cut through the bullshit, at the other are the ones who believe the MacDonalds healthy fast-food ads.

Of course, I could be wrong. I frequently am.

Re:But, how do you really feel?

[dimator]

Imagine this wasn't an interview by the founder of Linux. Imagine (most) everyone on this forum didn't already despise Microsoft, and/or love Linux.

Now, is Microsoft a monopolist? Before you answer, read up on your history. Have they used this monopoly power to hurt consumers, by locking them in, by limiting choice?

If that's the American Dream, then I maybe its time to revise the American Dream.

By the way, from here, an ecosystem is "a community of organisms." There isn't much of an ecosystem if one of the "organisms" has absolute power over every other one.

Woah there!

[MarcQuadra]

Hey there!

If Linux isn't ready for the desktop, how did my otherwise computer illiterate ex-girlfriend start using it for web/email/AIM/wordproc? How do people who come over my house know how to use the 'weird' machine? How is it a more pleasant desktop experience than XP for most people who try it out on a managed (read: not the 'everything installed' default system)?

Linux is ABSOLUTELY ready for the desktop, but like any new OS, you need someone who knows what they're doing to show it (and tailor it) to each individual newbie. Average folks weren't BORN with the Windows way of doing things already in their heads. The lack of Linux on the desktop is the result of several factors:

1. Not large enough expert userbase to provide 'neighborhood support'.
2. No marketing to the home market.
3. Total disregard/denial of desktop viability by admins and managers afraid of an OS that isn't their current bread-and-butter.
4. People like you.

In any case, Linus is as responsible for Linux GUI usability as You or I, that being 'not at all'. You can't blame a kernel hacker for the faults of the designers of the windowing environment, toolkits, and desktops.

um, metamods?

[foreverdisillusioned]

Only on slashdot could QUOTING THE ARTICLE be deemed "offtopic."

Re:Highlights

[pmfp]

I see. So when someone will outsource your job, maybe it is not a bad thing after all. It is just someone else's "American Dream".

They have equally much right to fight for their aspirations as you and me. It's a global competitive market; if you're not offering a better solution than others, you will not be picked.

Of course, American's are perplexed why US is generally the most hated country in the world. With this type of "American Dream"... LOL.

The hatred for the USA is far more complex than you make it seem. It is not an entirely rational argument and it is many times not even dependant on the actions of the USA, although there are many cases which are.

I've spent a lot of time both inside and outside the USA. There are a great number of misconceptions of the character and source of the hatred, as well as the nature of the USA. Just do what you believe is the right thing, you will be despised either way.

As for the American dream, I would like to give you a quote:
"I do not choose to be a common man. It is my right to be uncommon. To seek opportunity to develop whatever talents God gave me - not security. I do not wish to be a kept citizen, humbled and dulled by having the state look after me. I want to take the calculated risk; to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed. I refuse to barter incentive for a dole. I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence; the thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of utopia. I will not trade freedom for beneficence nor my dignity for a handout. I will never cower before any earthly master nor bend to any threat. It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid; to think and act myself, enjoy the benefit of my creations and to face the world boldly and say: 'This, with God's help, I have done.' All this is what it means to be an American."
Dean Alfange