Slashdot Mirror
ESR Wants to Retire
hexix writes "ESR
wants to
retire from his job, and he is looking for someone to take over."
Eric says the stress of being away from home, having too
little quiet time, and the community's reaction to him is
burning him out.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I'd like to ask why Linux needs to be in the mainstream. For me it was always the need for more hardware support. NDA's aren't very free software friendly. Just admit it. You people want Linux to kick Microsoft's ass. The "retirement" article even mentions Redmond. Linux doesn't need the mainstream to survive. Infact its my belief that Linux will do much better without the strive for the mainstream audience. Right now the Linux community is anything but one. If we quit pushing Linux things would get much better (look back about one year ago at the Slashdot comments). The only thing that Linux will get IMO is a loss of free software developers. Its great that we have advocates like ESR, but maybe he is advocating the death of Linux. Developers don't want to feel like their hard work is being abused by commercial companies. This will happen over time. Companies do not care about Linux, nor the community. If you have had any job in America then you would understand that companies (in America anyways) only care about one thing--money.
Anyways, lets quit advocating and get back to the community (the same one which creates a fake transparent xterm screenshot for looks--and later creates real transparent xterms. The one which created Wilber and Tux).
I agree, I've been using Linux for a year and a half only, and sometimes forget how Linux started. What made Linux so strong is the liberty of expression of it's community, but also it's good sense.
Sometimes I get the feeling that flamers think they have such a small role in the developpement of Linux that they rather flamer to get heard, since it's an easy way of getting noticed.
It's kind of like comparing Windows and Linux by saying "windows sucks".. it's an easy flame, but not a smart one. Linux rocks way more than windows can suck!
To get back to ESR, he knew how to prove that Open Source was benefic, and at the same time he was unintentionnally (at first) reprensenting a very large community. I mean, if he said stupid things, where would we be today?
Maybe we should create more documentation on how to adopt a flamer's perspective to the Linux-advocacy? (I know a HowTo exists, but not many flamers read it). I've started writing a little, but I write in french, and I'm not really good at it.
But, is anyone ready to take on the responsibilities ESR has? I think he's saying, "If you want my job then come take it."; if not then let me do it the best way I can.
I may not agree with everything he says or does but I find I agree more than not. We can debate his decisions without personally impuning him.
As for ESR, I've got a word or two for you. We need someone with your experience - just don't expect us to follow blindly - we are peers not subjects. Whether or not something is Open Source or not will be decided by logical and informed debate - not by one person.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
I use to support a lot of what Mr. Raymond was doing, providing guidance to corporations on how to get into this groovy 'open source' stuff that was totally happening. The NPL, whose final status as a free software license, can be at least partially attributed to him (were others very involved? I can't remember). I am looking forward, in a big way, to Netscape 5.
As time has passed, however, he has felt the need to engage in more self-promoting behavior to keep his position, until he was doing as much self-promotion as actual work. I think the new Apple license is the final thing that made him lose acceptance with a lot of free software and open source advocates.
In my opinion -- and it's apparently an opinion shared by many here -- the APSL is a marketing hijink and a joke. Although Mr. Raymond supports it as Open Source (which is his right), it is very clearly not free software, since among other things it can't be used in other code, even personal changes are controlled by a central corporation, etc.
I certainly have questions about whether the job Mr. Raymond has been doing needed filled -- I use proprietary software, and I'd rather know I was using proprietary software than thinking it was free -- but more importantly, I think that if the job is going to be filled, the applicant needs to avoid being used as a marketing tool.
I'm afraid that I think that's what has become of Mr. Raymond -- a company can apparently now manage to compromise the community from which Mr. Raymond hails, with his support and belief that it is helping the community.
Here's to your ideals, Mr. Raymond, and I'm sorry we live in a world where they are compromised.
--Matthew
Firstly, I'll state that I don't mean to sound negative about ESR, although I disagree with his views on a large number of issues, and also the way he often went about his "role" as "open source advocate", I'm sure he did what he thought was best, and life is nasty that one can't go back and try things differently to see whether other ways would have infact been better.
:)
But, assuming for the moment that we do need to have someone in the "open source advocate" role, my question is why is being a top notch coder a requirement?
I realise that some of the people involved in open source may not accept a non-coder, or even someone with only average coding ability. But why not? To me it makes perfect sense.
There are hundreds of people who can't code but would like to contribute something useful. These people DO have much to offer. They're often better public speakers, or writers, or have better people skills, or are better managers, etc, than most coders. So why should we insist that they must be a top notch coder to represent the interests of open source?
I think the best way forward is to free the people who's primary interest is in writing code from the responsibilities of these sort of "advocate" positions. There are plenty of people out there who have more time, are more willing, and are just plain better qualified to do those things. By letting the people who like to code just code, then we get more code written, which can only be a good thing.
The free software/open source message affects everyone, not just those writing the code. Computers are such a big part of modern life that to suggest only the "nerds" have any interest in their future is foolish. And what better way to reach out to the vast majority of people in the world who are not coders than to have people who are in a similar position explain what open source is about to them? Seems far more sensible than to send some computer geek, as lets face it, coders don't have a reputation amoungst the general community as someone you'd want to listen to or read about.
If a celebrity wants to write a book, they usually get a ghostwriter to assist them. If I want to build a house, I get an architect to draw up the plans. So why shouldn't the "coders of the world" who are interested in open source software be happy to have someone who's more qualified to speak on their behalf? Or do we find that concept just too threatening?
I guess I'm an exception to everything I just said above though, because I'm a programmer who'd rather be spend more time in philosophical debates and discussion, and less time coding. Though I'd never want to take on the role ESR had. But I do think the discussion that goes on in the open source world is at least as important as the code itself, and hence that's where my dislike for the idea of measuring everyone by what code they've written comes from. Each opinion starts out equal, it's up to the words the speaker uses to prove or disprove it, NOT who the speaker is.
Qualifications, Smalifications. You don't have to be qualified to be right, and being qualified doesn't prove that you're right. It can help in reaching a position where you have the knowledge to be right, though.
So in brief, I think what we should look to is a future where ESR's sucessor doesn't need to be a "hacker" like he was. In fact, I for one am hoping they're not.
"Now watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical, liberal, fanatical, criminal." - Supertramp, The Logical So
One of the things I have seen so many times with the internet and the free software community is that sometimes the most "devastating" loses, end up being just a "short term" problem.
When the net lost ihnp4, we didn't get another major site that handled a large percentage of the email, we got a dozen less important sites that actually worked better. The transition was painful, but not fatal. The end result was a much more resilient system that had a total capacity far greater than ihnp4.
When Rich Adams stopped developing BNews, two groups of developers tried to fill the void. One worked on BNews 3.0, I forget their names. The other group developed CNews. When Henry Spencer stopped developing C-News, Rich $alz kind of replaced him with INN. It wasn't an exact replacement, but the result couldn't really be said to be worse, it was just different. Now a days, usenet is quickly being replaced by the web and things like slashdot. They aren't the same as Usenet, but I don't think they are worse.
I can think of a dozen people who fit most of the criteria that ESR spelled out, and the criteria that they don't meet would probably mean that they would just perform slightly different jobs, instead of being an exact replacement for ESR.
So, I have a great deal of hope that if ESR, RMS, Linus, Alan, Rob, et al stopped doing what they are doing, that the void they leave would be filled, sometimes with a much better system. In particular, if ESR stops doing what he is doing, I think he will be replaced by many people, all having to do a smaller job, all giving a broader range of views of the OSS community, none of them as likely to burn out. I have hope, and I have history to back up that hope.
Still, losing ESR would be a very real lose. I don't wish for him to go any more than I wish for Linus, RMS, et al to go. I think it would be very wise to think about our actions to all of these people, and for people far less famous. Why should anyone get the flames that RMS, Bruce Perens, or ESR get? They are not evil. I don't even think they are misguided. In fact, I think they are better guided than most of the rest of us.
SPF support for most open source mail servers can be found at libspf2.
What I really don't want to see is a public relations committee without a figurehead. (The last thing this community needs is another committee.) I personally hope that Mr. Raymond makes a comeback, but until then, God help the poor media as it tries to understand the leanings and dynamics of today's code hackers.
I hereby nominate Cmdr Taco as spokesman. He doesn't have enough to do. No, wait. Perhaps then Jon Kat-- Oh, I can't even finish that joke. Alas. Goodbye, Mr. Raymond.
--
(sourceCode == freeSpeech)
Well, I read "the job" requirements as described by ESR, and... hey, what a coincidence! They describe ESR's resume to a tee!* In fact, I can't imagine "the job" being done by anyone with any different background whatsoever! Wow. Self-serving is as self-serving does, I suppose. But rather than just sling easy mud, perhaps we should look in earnest at what "the job" does require, now that someone says they're vacating the position. Most of what ESR laid out is still useful, though he might just as well have added: open to criticism, charismatic, and experienced with grassroots organizing/politics. But then... Anyway, I nominate Miguel de Icaza. It doesn't take CNNfn to acheive world domination, when MTV will do just as well. Here's to version 2. * Actually, I never bought that "anthropology/sociology/psychology" line. "Cathedral" wouldn't last two minutes in front of soc sci peer review.
I am not a big believer in ad hominem discussions. The merit of a position stands and falls on its own validity, not on who says it. I preface my comment with this statement, because in general I work very hard in my postings to stick to the ideas not the people behind them. But since Mr. Raymond laid down the ad hominem gauntlet in this latest letter, I have no choice to respond in kind.
/.) dare to attack his positions, then he's going to take his toys and go home.
It is true, that people relate to people more than to abstract ideas. So any political or philosophical position needs a spokesperson to have it spread and be accepted in a broader forum.
Anyone who takes on that role, must be prepared for all the aspects that go with "spokespersonhood". A good part of that is being criticized, fairly or not, not just for what you say, but how you say it and what you do. It's part of the territory. Those who are being "represented" can justifiably hold their leaders to a higher standard. For if you are going to speak in MY name (especially if I didn't choose you to do so), then you damn well better be equal or better than me, in every way. A leader should be a source of inspiration, someone people look up to, not someone who shames us by their words or actions.
Unfortunately, many, if not all leaders, become totally identified in their own minds with their ideas. They take attacks on their positions as personal attacks. It is very hard to avoid this egotistical disease.
In fact, in the world of free software, the ONLY leader who so far has managed to avoid this, and given his nature probably always will, is Linus Torvald. Nick Peterley compared him to Tom Bombadil - a man over whom the ring of power has no influence. What an apt description. Linus is in fact a holy man, an exceptional human being whose ego is just the right size.
Eric Raymond, however, isn't. It is clear from this latest diatribe that the fact that many people strongly disagreed with calling the Apple APSL as open source, got his goat. He took the attack on Apple as a personal attack on himself. I read alot of the discussions. There were lots of strong opinions, but very little that can be characterized as ad hominem attacks on Raymond as such. His reaction in this letter can only be characterized as pitiful for a man who wants to be a leader.
In this "response", Mr. Raymond has resorted to the cheapest of demagoguery. The sad part is that so many people fell into his trap. Basically, what Raymond is saying in his letter is I am a god and anybody who criticizes me is a worthless ingrate. Instead of responding to the merit of the arguments against his positions, Mr. Raymond resorts to threats and insults to silence those who disagree with him. In a fit of pique worthy of a four year old, he says that if those worthless little ingrates (presumably on
Quite frankly, I am willing to bet anyone on this list that Raymond isn't going home so fast. It is quite clear from his letter that he enjoys the "face time" (what an ugly expression) with such "luminaries" as Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos, and all the other "perks". Well good for him. But that shouldn't stop anyone from standing up and speaking the truth when the truth needs to be said, even if that truth is uncomfortable for a man who just exposed himself to the world as being egotistical, childish and unworthy of leading an intellectual revolution as important as the free software movement.
Remember all those /. articles you've read that had quotes from ESR? Their easy to remember because they almost always mention that Eric wrote "Cathedral and the Bazaar". Nearly everyone knows who wrote that paper.
And yet he didn't list being able to write as one of his qualifications. Even so he's already (26 comments so far), getting flamed for that list. Despite forgetting that you should be able to write too, he still gets flamed!
Fat chance finding anyone to replace him! It's hard enough to find a great coder, let alone one willing to work for free. And then ask that he be good at speaking in front of large audiences! Hehe. Suuuuuuure. No problem. Oh, and can he be creative and write really well too?
Don't think that he needs to be replaced? That's what I thought too. But we all know that just because you make a great product doesn't necessarily result in winning the game. And up until ESR retirement I'd just taken it for granted all those quotes and speaches. Now too late I understand the need. Hopefully enough of the people that flamed him before will too.
This kind of excrement is worth refuting...
Open Source and Free Software has come to a point where mainstream press would have noticed it. It is vital that people get in there and provide facts and refute all the FUD out there.
The Micro$hafts of the world have a large number of spin doctors that there entire job is to help solidify their position. Free Software/Open Source? Only the self-propelled, self-proclaimed, arrogant guys are willing to step forward. Thus ESR climbed to the top. I hope another as self-assured as he rises to the top.
Gordon
It's easy to feel sympathy for ESR for the grief he gets from hormone-hyped adolescents, as he describes it.
But in generalising about the source of criticism in this way, he fails to recognize and accept that there might be valid criticism out there as well.
For example, none of the reasons ESR cites as generating criticism bother me at all, yet one that he doesn't cite I find very important: his continual negativity regarding RMS, FSF, GNU and everything in that general neck of the woods.
If ESR did just as he writes in his essay and was an entirely positive embassador then I would support him totally. But I find it hard to support people whose visible strategy is to knock other well-regarded folk in the movement at every opportunity.
We don't need an either-or scene here. The success of free software and open source rests on everyone building upon everyone else's valuable efforts, ie. cooperation and not confrontation. Ambassadors need to be positive.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Slashdot Longhairs flame ESR for trying to make a point. I can see it now. Amazing that the guy has feelings. You'd almost think he was human or something.
I mean is it really to much to ask that makers of software and people doing a service to the open source community not be flamed at every turn or even thanked once in ahwile? is there so little respect that we can't atleast recognize another for their achievments and actions?
At what point does the ego take a back seat and we try to work toghether? why should an idea be a reason to totally discredit a person? I have an idea. instead of flaming try to make your points of disagreement known and if you don't have any points to say don't say anything you'll help your self in the end by showing your intelligence is above that of a 12 year old who just got a new computer.
"We want to take over the world, but we don't want to do it tomorrow, it's OK if it's next week"-- Linus Torvalds
Many of us have been banging on about the benefits of open source code (as opposed to totally free software) for some time, but it was ESR who stuck his head out, took the flak, and stuck the phrase "Open Source" on the map.
The two things to learn from ESR are: free software, if it's to be adopted more widely, needs a "mainstream" image, even if that image is a little off-beat, and secondly, you have to build that image without alienating the people you're trying to help - many of whom may want their software how it is, and don't care whether it's embraced by a wider world.
First, let me say: when you hitch the trailer to the tractor, it's the kingpin that takes the stress.
Second: who asked ESR to promote the open-source community and concept? Well, some people expressed an interest, and he stepped up to the plate. I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE FUCKING POINT! You see a need, you fill it! Hello?!? Isn't that what every reactionary "corporations suck, free software rules" author here espouses -- solving problems?
I dunno. Here I was thinking that the people who were really into free software believed that if you don't like something, do it better instead of whining. So why is it I hear nothing but whining from people who don't like what ESR is doing, instead of seeing some fuckin' action?
Foul language? Crude expressions? Yes -- there's a reason, I'm pissed at the hypocrites who stand around badmouthing ESR without doing a damn thing to improve the situation themselves.
Flames to garrett@memesis.org, slashdot can do without your 2-bit opinion of me.
Nothing worth doing is worth doing today.
I loved what ESR had to say. He summed up everything that I hate about the well-intentioned-yet counterproductive "advocacy" that is so popular these days. Note to newly-converted linux fans: sometimes you can do more damage than good with your hollering and chest-beating.
When you feel like backseat-driving, just ask yourself "What have I ever done that makes me such an authority on this subject? Why must my voice be heard?"
Remember, linux was built from the effort of hundreds of fallible, flawed humans. Many of them are justifiably proud of their accomplishments. If you hassle them, they just might take their efforts elsewhere.
I'm here today when companies like Creative Labs are just now waking up to to Linux, through the help of those TLAs you disdain. There are still a large number of mfgrs out there that aren't convinced that Linux is worth their time, and they won't be until it is more 'mainstream'.
One point that's worth remembering is that most of us are more directly exposed to ESR's self-promotion and general promotion of OSS than the people he actually targets. That's because his targets are busy reading generic trade rags such as the Wall Street Journal and are getting bombarded by far more marketing from a wider set of angles than most of us. In contrast, the average hacker gets his news from finely tuned websites and Usenet groups with appropriately configured killfiles, filters, etc..
A great many people I know in the open/free/whatever software world try to isolate themselves from the general marketing thrash 'out there', carefully filtering what they're presented with using kill files, spam blockers, staying away from TV, etc. As a result, ESR represents a much larger blip on our radar screen than the radar screens of corporations at-large. This is a natural side effect of the hackers' desire to control the relevance of information in their lives.
The result is that ESR appears as a tireless self promoter, and the hacker community ends up proving that it's not so tireless in its ability to put up with this seemingly non-hacker behavior. That's why I believe ESR comes across so strongly to everyone in the hacker community -- he's cranked the wattage so the suits can see him at all, but he's overpowering our receivers as he does it because we haven't learned when to tune him out.
Don't let ESRs high-wattage broadcasts regarding OSS overpower you. Just because you're not immersed in Microsoftia all the time doesn't mean the suits he's trying to sway aren't.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
So when all hardware goes proprietary, and Linux will only work on old hardware, and the world demands that you live and work in it, what will you do? If you don't shape the world to your ideals, the world will shape you to it's ideals.
If the Linux "community" keeps silent, and lets the world go to hell, and everything becomes proprietary and corporations own everything but the equivalent of some hobbyists commodore64s in their basement, what will we do? If we stand silent and watch the world degenerate, what good will Linux be? If we silently give consent to information being as hidden as possible, what good will Linux be?
As Eisenhower said, "People who value their priveleges above their principles soon lose both." If we just sit the corner and do our own thing, what will we do when the hardware that we are running fails, and their are no open replacements? What will we do when everything is proprietary, and corporations own the world?
People have civic responsibility, even if they don't like to admit it. No one should have what they do belittled because "it was their duty". I'd never be ungrateful to Linus and claim that he did no more than his duty. But where would he be if he never started Linux? And if *BSD was never written?
If we don't try to leave the world a better place than we found it, we're pretty much guaranteed to leave it a worse place. Of course, given a fiarly large lifespan, like thirty or fourty years, we'll probably get to live in a good portion of the decay that we didn't prevent. If we make nothing good, what will we do when we look for good things? When the rivers are going to overflow their banks, we must shore them up, or we will drown. The corporate rivers are poised to overflow their banks. Shall we sit by minding our own business and be drowned in them?
They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
It's hard to understand WHY people in this community are so bent on getting corporations to embrace oss, if you forgot that some of use don't want to live in a world with:
-hardware released with proprietary windoze-only drivers, and no available specs
-NT servers that we can all go to work and pull our hair out over, because that's what the boss bought
-near-monopoly in the os market from a certain empire
-winmodems
wait, that's where we live right now! Except because of the efforts of people like esr, businesses are moving the other way. Sure, free software will get better regardless, but some of us would like to also use it at WORK. And sooner, rather than later. Ok, so ESR hasn't improved linux *lately* (he did code a lot - more than most of us) but his job now, as he calls it, is important in its own way. So what if he promotes himself? Don't forget that he was instrumental in Netscape's freeing of the code.
And if you, for whatever reason, genuinely don't care whether or not companies embrace linux, please respect the fact that some of us do. Raymond isn't trying to pervert 'the cause', and, though I don't know him, I would guess that his goal is not to boost his ego.
Guys, he's one of us.
Vidi, Vici, Veni
This equality of enterprise is bigger than any one individual. This movement is moving on, and like any tempest that ravages the land, it will eventually disipate into a thousand other things, but will have left its indellible mark. These marks will mostly be things that people did, like write an operating system, or herald a cause, or start a foundation, or bring a community together via a website.
We the supporters of the open source community need heroes, and we need these heroes to help carry the message to the masses. I feel like it is to our benefit to have as many heroes in the public eye as the public will have. For this I hope that as ESR redefines his role in this community we will be capable of supporting new people who can carry our message to the masses. Just like the kernel is now too big for Linus, ESR is telling us that the soapbox is too big for the current crew. From one perspective, this presents a unique and interesting problem that some of us will find inviting, and will want to attack. At risk of drawing too many parrallels with kernel development, we should be concerned that we don't present too many interfaces that won't stand the test of time. Having trusted focal points for the press and others will ensure credibility. So while ESR says that he would leave the stage I would hope that there would be a happy medium.
bnf
p.s. Anyone here realize that Microsoft's Stock has reached an inflection point, signalling that the rate of increase has stopped growing. This is generally caused by a stock reaching its market cap or by an encroaching competitor gaining market share. They know what's happening, and we've begun to see the FUD roll out with finer craftsmanship. This is the time when we should stand strong as a community and intelligently communicate our messages.
this space intentionally left blank (oops)
man it makes me feel bad to read reports like that (recent article: Take my job, ... Then once we have gatherd all these items, using our main 'tool',
please!).
Sometimes i feel like the best thing this community has to offer, is also gonna
be its downfall. In a way it represents the way whole of humanity is structured.
We learn how to get a great new tool, be it fire, nuclear power, or be it linux,
then once we have mastered this tool, harnased its power, or some of it, we use
it to burn our selves. We kill millions of people, just to see how well this new
bomb can go boom. Now sometimes it seems like the same thing is happening to the
linux comunity, we have a great tool, something that can revolutionise the way
we see the world, the real and virtual, the way we deal with econimic issues,
and more
our voices and opionions, we again, as a human race, not just hackers, use it to
burn our selves.
I just wanted to let you know i feel for you, and want to express my deepest
apoligies, for my self, and other fellow coders, who have just a little more
social skill then a chimpansee...
Hope you'll hang in there for now, till we can have this situation sorted out,
and again, may the power, and source be with you my friend...
-- Chris Chabot
"I dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it!"
I think ESR's note itself is an interesting comment on why he is such a controversial figure. It's a very smooth piece of writing, and it's clear from a lot of these Slashdot posts that many people haven't fully groked his piece.
You'll note that nothing he wrote makes it look particularly likely that he's going to retire anytime soon. Indeed, it seems like one of his main points is that the job he's doing is one that requires some pretty hard-to-find qualifications. And, you'll notice what his punch-line is: if you can't do it, then stop being such a mean-spiritied critic.
And this brings it back to why ESR is so controversial: he's very slick. He wants to reprimand his critics, and he does so, while slicking past most of his audience that much of his point is to reprimand his critics (Bruce, are you listening?)
Personally, I don't mind ESR too much, and I don't take him too seriously. I think he has been filling a useful function, and I think, despite his protestations, that he probably likes the self-aggrandizement that goes along with it. But that's par for the course and I for one am not complaining.
But I don't think of what he says as gospel, and I understand why he makes some people nervous.