Slashdot Mirror


Linus Torvalds on Social Media: 'It's a Disease. It Seems To Encourage Bad Behavior.' (linuxjournal.com)

From a wide-ranging interview of Linus Torvalds with Linux Journal on the magazine's 25th anniversary: Linux Journal: If you had to fix one thing about the networked world, what would it be?
Linus: Nothing technical. But, I absolutely detest modern "social media" -- Twitter, Facebook, Instagram. It's a disease. It seems to encourage bad behavior. I think part of it is something that email shares too, and that I've said before: "On the internet, nobody can hear you being subtle". When you're not talking to somebody face to face, and you miss all the normal social cues, it's easy to miss humor and sarcasm, but it's also very easy to overlook the reaction of the recipient, so you get things like flame wars, etc., that might not happen as easily with face-to-face interaction. But email still works. You still have to put in the effort to write it, and there's generally some actual content (technical or otherwise). The whole "liking" and "sharing" model is just garbage. There is no effort and no quality control. In fact, it's all geared to the reverse of quality control, with lowest common denominator targets, and click-bait, and things designed to generate an emotional response, often one of moral outrage.

Add in anonymity, and it's just disgusting. When you don't even put your real name on your garbage (or the garbage you share or like), it really doesn't help. I'm actually one of those people who thinks that anonymity is overrated. Some people confuse privacy and anonymity and think they go hand in hand, and that protecting privacy means that you need to protect anonymity. I think that's wrong. Anonymity is important if you're a whistle-blower, but if you cannot prove your identity, your crazy rant on some social-media platform shouldn't be visible, and you shouldn't be able to share it or like it.

Linux Journal: Is there any advice you'd like to give to young programmers/computer science students?
Linus: I'm actually the worst person to ask. I knew I was interested in math and computers since an early age, and I was largely self-taught until university. And everything I did was fairly self-driven. So I don't understand the problems people face when they say "what should I do?" It's not where I came from at all.

11 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. Uhh it's not social media.... by blahplusplus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... the reality is the internet has shown us the true face of the human race - everyones reality is right and it's those other guys who are incorrect. It has been the average human being and the masses getting internet. We've seen everyone come online over the last 20 years.

    Watching the last 20 years of slashdot comments has been surreal. The rise in anti intellectualism as more normal people came online and the dumbest shit you can possibly imagine getting upvoted. The outright destruction of PC gaming and the masses falling on their own sword and falling for the mmo scam, drm and steam. As an original nerd from the 90's, the masses getting internet has just shown us how stupid the human race is from every class and every walk of life.

    Everything PC nerds in the 90's were worried about came true, and what a gift the internet has been to the corporate world that the average human being is so uncaring and unflinchingly stupid, they'd literally bend over to have their rights and freedoms taken away but do so willingly.

    1. Re:Uhh it's not social media.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting


        the reality is the internet has shown us the true face of the human race - everyones reality is right and it's those other guys who are incorrect. It has been the average human being and the masses getting internet. We've seen everyone come online over the last 20 years.

      I'm afraid I don't entirely agree with you, but I do agree with some of it. Some of what you're saying is true. Part of the problem is certainly that 25 years ago, in 1994 it was largely a bunch of academics and students online. They followed the social norms of academics, and there was this thing called "netiquette". Flame wars still happened, but the internet wasn't some big flame war.

      I agree that human nature can push people to extremes of hate and tribalism. But we've managed to produce some pretty amazing things over the years too.

      What I disagree with is that it has to be like this. Most people interacting in-person don't engage in flame wars. What Linus says is basically right.. that the social media that exists magnifies this. "Like" is too simplistic, and itself encourages binary thinking. It encourages the tribal, one-sided nature of humans. It encourages emotional responses. The algorithm driven nature of Facebook, combined with likes creates this mini-tribe where everyone quickly figures out what "the majority" wants. Combine that with all the problems we're currently experiencing with victim culture, outrage culture, and conspiracy laden BS, and you have the current online environment.

      People put out this sort of toxic sludge online to get more likes. They self-segment into these sides. And don't you DARE say anything that your tribe doesn't agree with. Stay inside the lines!

      Watching the last 20 years of slashdot comments has been surreal. The rise in anti intellectualism as more normal people came online and the dumbest shit you can possibly imagine getting upvoted.

      It's sad... I used to actually learn things reading Slashdot. Now it's just this constant idiot war. It got so bad I randomized my password for Slashdot and stopped logging in about 7 years ago. I used to read for the comments, but now they've all mostly turned into toxic slew from braindead idiots. Yours is probably the smartest comment I've seen yet this year.

      I don't honestly know what killed Slashdot. Probably some of what you say, the rest of the idiots arriving. But I have to think it's partially the fault of management for not promoting a better culture. It is sad though, and I also miss the Slashdot of the mid 2000s or so.

    2. Re:Uhh it's not social media.... by citylivin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd more agree with linus actually, that there is so little emotion that comes across in an email. I have a board member that i have to deal with and he is a huge antagonist over email. LIke i think the guy is just pissed all the time and outraged about every little thing.

      However when you talk to the guy in person, he never raises his voice, never yells, and is one of the most happy and compromising people that I have ever met.

      I am sure everyone knows someone like that, completely different online and off. The problem i think is what linus describes, many people don't know how to communicate over text and can appear curt, or rude or worse, when really if you had the exact same conversation offline, they would be reasonable and understanding. It probably does have to do a lot with unconscious cues.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  2. Self-Driving Cars to the Rescue by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's good that they're electric because people are going to travel much more when they don't have to do the driving.

    Somebody who spends three hours a night on social media now can, in the future, hop in a car and go hang out with real humans for two hours.

    Internet interaction is cheap and easy - install lots of solar panels to charge your car and real human-human interaction becomes nearly as cheap and easy. Yes, you have to put pants on, for most meetups, but the reward ought to be sufficient for the effort.

    There are those who would just rather avoid human contact, but they make poor friends online and off. Seriously, you people, go be a hermit - that's a legit lifestyle choice for certain kinds of people.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  3. "Anonymity overrated" by bradley13 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "if you cannot prove your identity, your crazy rant on some social-media platform shouldn't be visible, and you shouldn't be able to share it or like it"

    In about 99% of the cases, I do have to agree with him. Anonymity is abused. Someone who wants to spew hate, drop f-bombs, disrupt discussions with ad hominem attacks - they almost always hide behind anonymity. If they acted like that IRL, someone would punch them. Make them put their real name* to their posts, they might moderate their speech, and add in some politeness and discussion.

    The practical problem is: how do you allow speech by true whistleblowers, or by other people in a position where they genuinely cannot speak with their own voice? How can a platform allow them to use true anonymity, without allowing it for the ACs? I don't think it's really possible. Moderation systems like /. or Soylent are the best compromise I've seen: start ACs with less visibility, and let mods raise them or bury them. It's not ideal, but it's better than almost any other system I've seen.

    *Yes, I practice what I preach: my pseudonym leads pretty directly to my real identity, and that is not an accident. It's just difficult enough to dissuade most trolls...

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:"Anonymity overrated" by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That theory has been tested, newspapers switched for a time from Disqus/internal commenting systems to Facebook comments, and of course you can compare Facebook and Twitter. There doesn't seem to be much difference in practice between what people spew under their real name and what they do under a pseudonym. Facebook, in my experience, is actually more toxic than Twitter.

      What the non-real name policies allows, which real names policies don't, is a modicum of freedom. I've had to sign company policies before severely restricting what I'm able to say on social media under my name, lest it be traced back to me, and then my employer. Given I want to be able to freely say "My boss was an ass today" from time to time (as does everyone) it's not hard to see how real names policies hurt people.

      It's relatively easy for Torvalds to say whatever he wants. The lower on the ladder you are, the worse your options are. Moderation is a solution, and it's far more effective than forcing everyone to reveal their names.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. He calls *code* ugly and stupid by raymorris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A distinction with Linus is that generally he calls some piece of CODE ugly or stupid, not a -person-. In the vast majority of cases, anyway. I've written a lot of stupid code, and I'll call my own stupid code stupid. I've written code that has a comment saying "this is ugly, but don't try to fix it because ....".

    I've written plenty of stupid and ugly code. I'm not stupid*. I think in Linus's mind that distinction is so obvious that he forgets it's not so obvious to some other people. He forgets that other people take "this code is still crap" as a -personal-insult; they hear him saying something about them, as opposed to saying something about the code. That's normal. It's just not how Linus thinks, and I personally have had to practice keeping in mind that people take things personally. -I- don't mind if you tell me my Makefile is goofy ASF. It probably is. That doesn't inply anything about me, other than that I'm not the King Guru of makefiles.

    * I am ugly

  5. That is TERRIBLE advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Do what you like" will leave you with lifelong debt and a degree that leaves you completely unemployable.

    Few are far between are people who have an authentic passion for something that pays well.

    If you are considering a degree in a field with a completely saturated job market, think again. On the one hand, every single one of the successes in that field will go on and on about how they stuck with it and persisted. And it makes you think "all I have to do is stick with it and persist!" But it is not true, because for every one of them, there are thousands of others who were just as talented and persisted just as long and wound up going broke and eventually burning out. Because there just aren't enough slots for everyone.

    It isn't a feel-good thought, but most of the work that provides stability and income is work that people don't enjoy doing. Find something you don't hate, that gets your hands dirty, and you will be WAY better off than chasing that dream of being a journalist.

  6. Re: Fuck off Linus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yeah we could just off loudmouths like you. No tech required, you're such a pussy posting shit online I can probably break your spine in 1 punch.

  7. Re:Bad behaviour, like his own? by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Linus underestimates the psychological damage you do to yourself when posting with your name. Facebook exploits this human trait like sugar industry exploits our being wired to get as much historically rare carbs as possible.

    This is a most insightful comment. Social media is looking more and more like a shared psychosis. Even a cursory study of the reward related dopamine responses in the brain with respect to UI behavior reveals what FB is doing to make people addicted.

    In time I suspect that social media will be recognized as toxic as smoking.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  8. Re:Advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The maker movement, arduino, and raspberry pi. Those communities are full of the excitement of not only writing your own code, but writing code that interfaces with the physical world. They're also very affordable, and much more welcoming and accessible than many of the old machines some of us grew up on.

    As someone who grew up with a trash 80, survived the rise of windows, and recently returned to hobby electronics/robotics/programming, I can tell you with no uncertainty that playing with tech is much more accessible and affordable now than it was back in my day.