Slashdot Mirror
Now It's Doctor Linus Torvalds
Uart writes "Linus Torvalds, is the youngest recipient (at 29) ever of The University of Stockholm's honorary doctorate. Read about it here." (From Linux Today).
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I would like to offer a constructive criticism of your posit there's alot of people out there that don't have a degree and are alot more intelligent than those who do.
There is a common confusion to both sides of the academic/non-academic struggle: education does not equal intelligence. Further, neither is an acceptable substitute for the other.
I would encourage you to view Linus' honorary doctoral degree as a validation by academia of his efforts and philosophy, instead of a slap in the face to the self-educated.
It should be pointed out that PhDs are given out for a new contribution to the field in which you are in.
:))
The only difference between Dr. Torvalds and other Drs is that Dr. Torvalds did not apply for his PhD, but still went through _all_ the work any other graduate student would go through.
And he did it in a lot less then the normally allocated seven years, too. Linus fully deserves this.
(Now he just has to write a book - if he hasn't already.
OFTC: By the community, for the community
So.. which part of that quote were you referring to in your statement..? Just in case, I'll examine the whole thing..
"He's just a really good hacker."
There are a lot of those around. They aren't considered rebellious, they're considered to "have a bright future" or "we need more of them".
"He doesn't care much about software politics."
Ok, now he's been lumped in with Joe Public and the rest of the "real world". I kind of doubt that would make him a rebel in the average person's eyes (unless you consider the average person to be someone who participates whole-heartedly in the BSD vs. GPL licensing holy war).
"He prefers free software, because he gets annoyed at not being able to fix bugs."
Maybe, at a stretch, you could consider this rebellious. Not when you consider the context, however. The point is, he doesn't care one way or the other. He isn't out to change anything. Therefore, he's not much of a rebel, now is he? If that /does/ make him a rebel, you should get a dictionary from a more *ahem* established source.
Richard Stallman, on the other hand, is mostly known for being a rebel at this point (even more than for his programming ability, one might say, even though he gave us the gift that is Emacs).
So, care to explain? I tire very easily of vague assertations, especially when they appear to be bereft of a stable foundation of /any/ kind..
~ Kish
Q: Dr. Linus, for the past few weeks my throat has been itchy, my nose has been stuffed up and I've been waking up in the middle of the night with my sheets soaked with sweat. I've tried taking asprin, tylenol and advil but nothing seems to work. What would you suggest? Your standard decongestants haven't been doing the trick either. - Joey Buttafuco
If I remember correctly Bill Gates got an honorary doctorate from the only dutch private university Nijenrode. This university deals in business administration, and related subjects. No technology at all. Although they call themselves a university, it's more a school than an institution dedicated to science.
:)
The shop where I always go to rent black and white tie, and morning suits, showed me a picture of Bill in his white tie dress, receiving his doctorate, because he had provided the suit. After I told him I don't like old Bill all that much he started complaining about the lack of style on Bill's part because he wore sneakers under his white tie.
I quite enjoyed the sight of Bill dressed up as a penguin though.
Tob (who openly admits to actually enjoying wearing formal dress, as opposed to the norm in our circles.)
I picked Dr. Evil, but now I want a recount.
Is it common practice to refer to someone who recieves an honorary Doctorate as Dr.? Or another way to put it, does an honorary Doctorate carry the same weight as a PHD earned through school?
It was announced in May that he *would* receive an Honorary Doctorate. This article is about the fact that he actually *received* it.
"Was going to get" is old - from May. "Has gotten" is new; the ceremony was held Friday.
I'd like to see, for once, highly technical jobs that judged you on the basis of your skills instead of "I'm an MSCE", or "I have a BA in *blah*".
--
Think he got any Red Hat shares through the IPO? I mean, after all, if anyone deserved shares, it was him. :-)
...
He might be doing better than we think
D
----
I am not trying to start anything, but this has always been my opinion on the Linux god status... what did he do that was so great? he took an existing concept (Unix) applied it to an existing architecture (Intel x86) and released it under an existing license (GNU) he just got publcity. i am not saying he is not a good programmer (i was i was half as takented as he was), but he has not done anything ground breaking or new ore anything that already is out there (plenty of Unixen out there already) if he wrote it all himself, then i would be more impressed, but it's like saying i am a master musician because i can play the Bethoven and Bach on a guitar.....i might be a good musician, but far from a genius.
Yeah sure, but here in Finland education is free, paid by the gov.
There is no such thing as free sex, I mean lunch.
Your paying the government back for that education in the form of taxes every day you work in Finland. The "government" is not some magical thing that makes money, its (at least it supposed to be) you and a lot of other people.
Unless of course you are planning to split the country as soon as you have earned your "free" degree. Like me
-
I'm not so sure of that. Perhaps he could earn a PhD in sociology by turning Linux development into a thesis on large-scale cooperation in software development. However, I doubt anybody would accept "I wrote a UNIX clone for the x86" as a computer science thesis.
As for the time period, the time period is normally seven years *total*, that's bachelor's plus PhD (PhD's rarely take more than 4 years by themselves), and Linus has taken more than that. Most people get their PhDs by the time they're 26 or 27 or so, and Linus is 29.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
One thing I've never understood about honorary doctorates is who is it best for? Are the universities being selfish, wanting to claim the next great mind or famous person as their own? Like universities giving honorary degrees and such to movie stars. I think Linus totally deserves the title Dr. and he's done more than the equivalent of work to get it. But is the University of Stockholm in it just to claim him and his lately growing fame as their's also? I'm just supicious of motives is all:)
-growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional
Really this is a case of politics. His contribution amounts to a small amount of one element of the computer system. His name rarely appears in any of the man pages or kernel source files and how much are you actually going to get done with just the kernel? How many times is Linus the one to ask when you're having trouble getting something done on Linux?
Well, obviously, you can't. Let me put it this way.. I don't have a problem with anyone awarding Linus. He's a good guy, he's a good hacker, and he's contributed.. a lot. The same reasons why I think it's cool that Richard Stallman and Larry Wall got awards for their contributions. I simply think they could phrase the reasons for awarding him a little better. I like and support all of the above parties, but the misconceptions and outright lies are getting to be a little too much.
I can see us reading books decades from now that mention vague references to "an earlier inventor of what we all came to know and love as Linux..".. Like the forgotten pages of history or something. ;)
~ Kish
Agreed. A few professors at my college planned an operating system as their thesis - no actual code. If this is enough, Linus is more than eligible.
Linux is an interesting piece of engineering but it is of little scientific meaning. Therefore it is unsuitable as a Ph D. thesis since the goal of a Ph D. thesis is to contribute to science. This does not mean that it is unsuitable as a research subject. For instance there is very little scientific material about the OSS development model (at least not that I know of) so that might be an area where research can be done. Apart from that there is little revolutionary I can think of. Basically the design is 20 to 30 years old tweaked with some modern stuff like clustering and stuff like that (mostly copied from other operating systems).
Of course Linus seems to be intelligent and knowledgable enough to write such a thesis but as far as I know he hasn't done so.
Jilles
Warning: The opinions expressed herein are strong, and may warrant others to label it "flame bait" or "troll".. However, you may want to pause and consider a few moments before rendering a verdict. ;)
"A small element, but essential - where would the open-source movement be today without a favourite OS underneath it?"
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm skeptical about the Hurd, although I'm confident that if the Linux kernel hadn't stolen the spotlight, it would have been ready long ago (not much interest in developing it since we already have a GPL'ed kernel, after all).
"(No, I'm not saying open-source wouldn't exist, nor that it's only linux that's open-source. But there is a 'certain relationship' between the d00ds at the FSF and, say, Debian...)"
That registers even less. So who are we blaming for the GNU/Linux OS here..? Are we calling the kernel the OS..? It just doesn't.. add.. up.. Not how it was stated, anyway. Of course, I can't help but wonder if you are implying that the FSF is a bunch of warez d00dz of not.. ;)
Also, who the hell cares where the "open source movement" would be? That's the most idiotic thing anyone ever came up with. Personally, I think that ESR is a fool, even though he is a big contributor. "Open source", indeed. That term is sooo easily corrupted. The thought of trademarking it to avoid such corruption is completely ridiculous. Open source means less than nothing. It certainly doesn't imply "free software". The SCSL is open source. So is the NPL. Does that make them good licenses? Don't worry, you won't have to put your thinking caps on for this one: The answer is NO!
At least the BSD license doesn't try to sucker you. It lets you know up front that it's just a step away from being "public domain". There wouldn't even be an open source movement if not for the free software movement, the original and other faction in the community. Free software is also a little bit ambiguous, thanks to the "intricacies" of the English language.. However, it's a little harder for companies to corrupt, don't you think? After all, not all "open source" products are necessarily zero-cost, so the other meaning of the term wouldn't apply too well on those. Even if it did, you wouldn't be so easily suckered because you would realize there was a couple definitions. Just look at the license. The term "open source" is a lot easier to rip apart through the media. Everyone can get a warm fuzzy feeling about the latest "open source" project..
Ugh.
~ Kish
I think it rather odd that they chose Linus of all people to refer to as a "rebel". I don't think there's anything particular "rebellious" about him. He's just a really good hacker. He doesn't care much about software politics. He prefers free software, because he gets annoyed at not being able to fix bugs, but he's not against proprietary software either. He doesn't really care. People can use whatever.
If someone would care to explain why this makes him a rebel, please feel free. :)
They got the "computer genious" part thing right though.. Though I could have done with the obligatory Transmeta plug..
~ Kish
I was told that a doctorate was awarded for
expanding the field of human knowledge, this is
the reason you have to choose a unique field
when you do one at college.
Linus has, (possibly inadvertantly at the time)
changed how we look at computer software.
I also think he has expanded the field of
achievements in computer science. 7 years ago
when I first saw the paradigm he was putting
forward I knew this was something new which was
only then starting to become reality due to the
internet.
I believe he may deserve a doctorate for three
reasons...
1) He's a very good programmer and a smart cookie.
2) He's popularised a new way of producing software.
3) He's changed the course of history.
Now he'll have to field silly phone calls from
panicing babysitters who pick up the phone book
and look at the first Dr. they see.
-- Don't believe everything you read, hear or think
Umm, your own numbers seem to support my age range. You say it takes 5 years after earning a bachelor's, or 6 for some fields. Since most people finish a bachelor's degree in 4 years, and are therefore 22, that would mean they earn their PhD by the time they're 27 or 28. I said "26 or 27," which is pretty darn close.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
You'll notice that we're talking about computer science, which is a math/science degree. We're not talking about English or Humanities PhD's - I know that these take longer.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
27 years of programming is not the same as an academic title.
"But counting soley on a degree to evaluate a person's worth is plain oversimplification"
I agree with you on that.
"A technical exam at the interview is both more fair and certain."
There's a lot more than technique you learn at a university. You can't test that in a simple technical exam. A university diploma certifies you as a person who got through a school that is known to be tough and challenging. This qualifies you as somebody with a certain amount of cleverness. On the otherhand if you drop out of college, that generally is a sign that you don't have what it takes to finnish college. This does not necessarily qualify you as an idiot but it is not exactly proof of the opposite either.
"But honorary PhDs are closer to what the real meaning of the degree should be"
Honorary Ph Ds are usually given to people who contributed in a positive way to society. Nelson Mandela for instance has several honorary Ph Ds. Seen in this light, Linus Torvalds Ph D. is entirely justified since he contributed to society. A honorary Ph D. is not the same as a normal Ph. D. since it does not have the requirement that you also contributed to science (which neither Mandela or Torvalds has done as far as I know). Often of course honorary Ph. Ds are given to people who did contribute to science but that is beside the point. It is not a requirement for receiving one.
A degree merely classifies you as somebody who reached a certain milestone. To get one you have to pass tests. If you fail those tests you don't reach your milestone (at least not in a verifiable way) and you don't get a degree. It's that simple.
So when you apply for a job and you can say I have this degree, your future employer knows what you are capable of.
Jilles
If you say so.. I guess. I don't think I "almost" have anything. I'm pretty well versed on the relavent facts. My point being that Linus is hardly the main contributor. No one is the main contributor. Unless you count the community as a whole. Some individuals have contributed more than others, but /no one person/ has single-handedly developed 51% of the GNU/Linux system. Not even close. Not by a mile.
Hence, three cheers for the community.
~ Kish
We once had DR Dos but I don't recall any DR Windows. And now we have DR Linux :)
Jilles
You think writing about how good an idea OSS developement would be worth a PhD, but actually doing it, being compared to the richest company, changing the way many people think about software, AND bringing Unix to the (cheap hardware) of the desktop, isn't?
(I know he didn't do it alone, but it wouldn't have been done without him.)
+&x
Dr. Linus Torvalds sounds *really* cool, and I believe he deserves it, but I find these kind of things annoying. When a person works to achieve a level high enough to earn a Dr. in front of their name, they should be recognized for that. Linus Torvalds is best known for one thing. Linux. And though Linux rocks beyond belief, he shouldn't be getting the same recognition as someone who has worked to get a college degree. The two activities are not comparable.
Linus deserves an award, but not this one.
aÍÍ©ÍÌÍ£Ì'̽ͩÌÍzÍYÌÍÌY
and this is part of a horrid breach of etiquitte by the medical profession.
The M.D. was constructed specifically to borrow the legitimacy of the Doctors of the Universities, in an attempt to produce physcians that were something short of dangerous.
Having insisted on being called Dr. for several generations, even though they lacked the distinguishing characteristic of Doctors--the contribution of new knowledge, they then attempted to monopolize the title, as "real doctors."
The holder Ph.D. is a Doctor, those with M.D.'s and J.D.'s are not.
Dr. Hawk, J.D., Ph.D., Esq.
that Caldera's new distro will be called "DR Linux"?
See you, space cowboy...
I have strong suspicions Linus job at Transmeta is to simply create a lot of hype and thus investment money, something they never would have pulled of without him.
Something that strengthens me in this opinion is that he manages to coordinate the linux kernel development in the time of his boss, something that could hardly be described as a light weight job.
Jilles
I had originally intended on ignoring the lack of attention to detail.. However.. The man who set down the rather expansive foundation for this great accomplishment, perhaps..?
Of course, if you really get down to it, no one person should recieve all the credit for creating the GNU/Linux system. Yes, Richard Stallman started it all, gave us Emacs, GCC, and so much more, gave us the GPL, and began a philosophical movement (which has now been factionized and corrupted). Yes, Linus Torvalds gave us the Linux kernel. Yes, this is all very good. The reality of it, however, is despite the fact that the GNU Project held it together until Linus gave them a final piece to their creation (and the rest being history, as they say..), it took a vast array of individuals all over the world to really bring all of this into being.
One person, or even a small group of people, can't put an entire OS together from scratch (well, not in any /sane/ amount of time). With the contributions of like-minded people from far and wide, however.. Well, we all know what can be accomplished when /that/ happens. :)
The true accomplishment, then, is the community's. Of which people like Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds are a part. Yes, they are widely renowned and respected (and even famous enough to be otherwise.. ;), but they are still a part of the community, and the entire community deserves the credit.
~ Kish
Everything in this day and age revolves around politics and PR issues, however. Most people seem to ignore the fact that Richard Stallman begat the GNU Project, which began this whole thing. And more importantly, that it wasn't just Stallman or Torvalds who put the entire thing together. There are many key contributors.. And beyond the more "well-known", there are thousands of hackers who have added something here or there.. Without the assistance of all of these different people from all over the world, nothing would have been possible.
Anyway, to add a little sense into my usual rant, if you always asked Torvalds for help when you had a problem with your OS, you'd get the stick. Big time. ;) It sort of depends on what the problem is in regards to as to who you should ask.. The GNU Project is usually a good default for someone to bother (especially if it's GNU software.. not much of that floating around these days, is there..?).
(As an aside, all of those "Stallman-slammers" who think he's an egotistical bastard who never did anything to deserve credit.. credit being something he doesn't seem to care about anyway.. I wonder what compiler you use..? ;)
~ Kish
I think our illustrious moderators have finally learned what a troll message is. However, it may have been dumb luck. We'll need more samples to determine if they've actually developed the ability.
I'm completely with you on the general uselessness of college certification. After all, I'm a college dropout myself but like to pretend that 27 years programming means something too. This is not to say that lots of smart people don't have degrees, or that college is a bad idea, they do and it's not. But counting soley on a degree to evaluate a person's worth is plain oversimplification. A technical exam at the interview is both more fair and certain.
But honorary PhDs are closer to what the real meaning of the degree should be. Someone who has not only mastered their field, but contributed to it significantly. In that sense I think this award to Dr. Torvalds is right on, and he deserves congratulations for it. If only all degrees were so well bestowed.
Two Issues:
a) Linus wrote the Linux kernel, he hasn't lifted a finger towards marketing it. Perhaps you might argue he enabled others (eg: Redhat, etc) to pursue such a model....
b) The whole Open Source business model is far from proven in my mind. We only have one significant company to point to, and that is Redhat software. While I like Redhat and would love to see them succeed; lets be realistic here. Redhat is a startup company, which isn't even profitable yet. Their current revenues are NOT coming from the much hyped "support" model, but rather from selling shrink wrapped CDs. What they're essentially selling is convenience. There "convenience" sales are not insignificant, but I have my doubts as to weather that will hold out. Futhermore, RedHat hasn't produced all that much in terms of code (not that I fault them in the least). They simply didn't have the resources and most of the work is/was done the the community.
Gee, well, that's nice for Linus and all, and I'm happy for him. It doesn't entitle him to call himself Dr. Torvalds, but who cares? He's a smart guy, did great work for the open source community, and deserves to be rewarded for it. What this really means to his life and work, though, is probably nothing...
Incidentally, how come other major contributors to UNIX and Linux development (Rob Pike immediately comes to mind, as he only has a B.S. yet is a full research MTS at Bell Labs) haven't been conferred such honors? Why? Publicity. Hype. Lobbying. That's about it.
Linux is a good OS, but it's not the end-all and be-all of UNIXen and UNIX-like variant OSes (sorry, but I pick OSes by their strengths for a particular job, and I will go to NetBSD, Solaris, and Irix as much as Linux... and NT on those rare occasions where it makes sense...), but the one thing it has over all others is good PR (and impeccable (Internet) timing)...
o/~ we are pissed, we are pissed, we have to resist... o/~ - ec8or
Ouch. A BS or BA at my school costs $120,000... give or take a year. If it's possible to get an honorary doctorate for $10K, sign me up!
</joke>
-Chris