Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linus Shares the Millennium Technology Prize

Posted by samzenpus on from the tied-for-first dept.

udas writes "The Millennium Technology Prize is awarded every two years for a technological innovation that significantly improves the quality of human life, today and in the future. This year, Linus Torvalds, Linux's creator, and Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, maker of a new way to create stem cells without the use of embryonic stem cells, are both laureates for the 2012 Millennium Technology Prize. This prize, which is determined by the Technology Academy of Finland, is one of the world's largest such prizes with candidates sought from across the world and from all fields of technology. The two innovators will share over a million Euros. The final winner will be announced by the President of the Republic of Finland in a special ceremony on June 13, 2012."

9 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by xzvf · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think the fix was on.

    1. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by xzvf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And before I get jumped on, Linus deserves it. Linux and open source in general, created more opportunity and employment than all the politicians combined. While the wealth wasn't concentrated in his hands like the Ellison's and Gates' of the world, what he started created a lot of income for many others. Stallman deserves credit too, for the creation of the GPL and the GNU tools Linus used, but his ideology would have prevented the operating system's success and effected the ecosystem that grew around Linux. We're lucky that the balance of technical savvy and tame ego of Linus allowed this revolution to happen.

    2. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Besides, we all know it should go posthumously to Steve Jobs for his technological innovation in...well...nothing really. But STEVE JOBS!

    3. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by openfrog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Stallman deserves credit too, for the creation of the GPL and the GNU tools Linus used, but his ideology would have prevented the operating system's success and effected the ecosystem that grew around Linux.

      You say one thing and its opposite in the same sentence. Linux could exist upon the principles and roots that were the vision of Stallman. You then want to speak about the attitude of Stallman, which some finds not to their taste, but this very attitude, and its concrete fruits in the continuing evolution of the GPL, has been a determining factor in the preservation and growth of this whole open source/free ecosystem.

      I find it short-sighted of the jury to have ignored this aspect of things and if I were Linus Torvald, I would share the prize with Stallman in a very public gesture. THIS would do wonders to advance open source/free software in the minds of many.

    4. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You say one thing and its opposite in the same sentence.

      He says the truth. Stallman's "You're either with us, or against us." ideology would be completely toxic in a leader of a project like Linux.

      Linus didn't set out to spread a philosophy, he set out to make something useful. He found a particular philosophy useful in the creation of this thing. Stallman is out to spread a religion.

      Note that I say this with no intention to imply anything Stallman says or believes is wrong.

      --
      Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
      Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
    5. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by openfrog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Stallman's "You're either with us, or against us." ideology would be completely toxic in a leader of a project like Linux.

      That's your mistake right there. First, your mis-characterization of Stallman's attitude does not reflect the spirit, and the very practical effect, of the GPL, at all. And second, Stallman's role and influence is not one of a leader of project like Linux. Different roles, different attitudes. You simply reaffirm old saws like "oh he just set out to do something useful without caring about such a nasty thing as ideology". My point is, and I re-assert it: without Stallman and his founding principles (call it what you want, I don't care), there would be no Linux, and without his dogged persistence and his very active and pro-active role as maintainer of the GPL, Linux, and the whole free software eco-system, would not have survived.

      I should have said it better: Linux, by sharing his prize with Stallman, would multiply the value of that prize, for both of them, by a factor of one or two magnitudes. He would make history.

    6. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by postbigbang · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sharing is good. The utilities that Stallman rewrote are historic, and have their origins in BSD, which is a version of Unix. The leadership in making the Linux kernel evolve stands on the shoulders of many, but riding several thousand elephants at once stands out for Linus. Stallman: somewhat solo. Linus: lasso'd a hurricane.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    7. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's your mistake right there. First, your mis-characterization of Stallman's attitude does not reflect the spirit, and the very practical effect, of the GPL, at all.

      I never mentioned the GPL in my post. I said his ideology. The GPL is a (very good) product of Stallman's ideology, but his ideology is much larger than the GPL. And it very much is an ideology that refuses to compromise and refuses to work with others who do not agree with the ideology. There's nothing wrong with that, it just prevents a person from successfully leading a project like Linux.

      And second, Stallman's role and influence is not one of a leader of project like Linux.

      And that's what I said, as well, but when the GP said:

      ... but his ideology would have prevented the operating system's success and effected the ecosystem that grew around Linux.

      I assume that's also what they meant, that Stallman could create the GPL and champion the cause of free software, but he could not successfully be in charge of Linux. And you said they were wrong, which led to me saying you were wrong... So who exactly is wrong here? :)

      --
      Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
      Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
    8. Re:Tech Acadamy of FINLAND!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Problem is that the FSF/GNU has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that they are incapable of producing a kernel on their own.

      GNU needed a free kernel. They started to (slowly...) work on that and called it Hurd. Then Linux, also a free kernel, just like Hurd, came along. Unlike Hurd, Linux was ready to ship. What that means to Hurd? It means Hurd was not vital anymore, resources could be allocated to other, more pressing, problems.
      Linux made Hurd unnecessary.

      If you think I'm bullshitting, RMS said in an interview:
      "The work that is needed is at the driver and firmware level. That's why our high priority task list includes items relating to free drivers, but not the HURD."