Like I described several posts ago, IF his behavior drives off good developers who don't want to be yelled at, THEN he can't really complain about not having good developers. That's what all of these words mean:
Look at the meaning in the words in my last couple paragraphs, where I say he's free to do whatever he wants, he just has to deal with the consequences. If his major work goal is working from home in his bathrobe while yelling at people, great, he's going to attract workers who want a boss who works in his bathrobe from home and yells at people. I'm not saying he has to change anything, but he also doesn't have any right to complain about the quality of people that he works with.
It would be like me walking into a fancy bar full of beautiful women while wearing a shirt that says "Show Me Your Tits" and then complaining that no women want to talk to me. I don't really have much of a right to complain about that if I'm being blatantly offensive towards them, do I? Linus can do whatever he wants (and, clearly, he does), but if his behavior drives off talented developers then he has no one to blame but himself. That's my point. He doesn't have to change. I don't care if he does change. He just needs to live with the consequences of his behavior, like everyone else. Some people choose to behave professionally so they can work with other professionals, other people decide to behave however the fuck they want, dick sucking and all, and be surrounded by whoever wants to put up with that. I don't really care which of those Linus chooses, I'm just stating which one I would choose, and I also think that his criticisms of what it means to be a professional are completely wrong.
I'm not particularly offended, I just think he can communicate better. I have very little skin in the game regarding kernel development, as long as it works I'm happy. I just try to see it from their point of view, if I brought up features in a development meeting and people start accusing me of sucking dicks. It wouldn't fly, those people wouldn't be in the next meeting. If it's obviously said in jest then that's one thing, but if someone is so irritated by my idea that they start talking about dick sucking instead of any sort of coherent response then I'm not going to have them in the next design meeting, and if they aren't in the design meetings then they might as well not work here.
To me he seems like average Finns are, straight to the point and not affraid to tell someone they are an idiot if they actually are. If anyone actually gets insulted from such mild "abuse" they need a thicker skin.
I don't have a problem telling an idiot that they're an idiot. But there's just no reason to bring up sucking dicks in a technical discussion. I get that he's exasperated trying to explain his position, but all he has to do is clearly explain it once and then link people to that explanation instead of taking the time to respond to everyone individually.
"Bow down to", "serve", "give the keys to", "surrender freedom to" etc. Any number of terms that do a much better job of describing what is literally happening.
BTW, I'm a computer engineer with 40 years programming experience doing kernel/drivers/realtime. There is no good technical reason for Linux to use PE format binaries for applications. Even if you could load them into userland, they can't run because the ABI is different. The are radically less useful as a format for loadable kernel modules.
What would a developer say/think if you told them that before they could publish [or even load] their kernel driver/module, they would have to submit it to Microsoft, wait five days to get it signed, before they could begin testing. Make a one line change to the source and recompile. Now resubmit and wait another five days... It is this nightmare scenario that prompted the comment and the idea is so bad
Sweet Jesus, all of that justification for why it shouldn't be implemented without a single reference to fellatio. I suppose it really can be done. I agree with what you say and how you say it. This is a good example of the way professionals should communicate with each other. It doesn't really need to be repeated either, once the justification is posted then any further discussion can just link to the already-posted justification.
This is totally off-topic, but why do I see so many people refer to it as "Visual Studios"? It's not plural, and I don't think it ever has been, where does that come from?
Why, because only homosexual people suck dicks? Believe it or not, but I actually know several heterosexual people who do in fact enjoy sucking dicks, and I think they're great people. No, I'm not homophobic, and this has nothing to do with sexuality. See what happens? The topic was parsing PE binaries, and now you're asking me if I'm homophobic. That kind of highlights the exact problem that we're talking about. Sexuality and sexual acts do not belong in a professional discussion about technical issues that have zero to do with sexuality.
There is nothing wrong with suck*ng d!cks or any other d!ck metaphor.
If there's nothing wrong with it then why are you self-censoring the phrase "sucking dicks"?
For instance he can use sexual metaphors without it becoming a massive issue for him.
I don't think that's really a sign of emotional maturity. I think a sign of emotional maturity is not automatically going to sexual metaphors to try and get your point across. A mature communicator can make his disagreement clear without accusing the other party of sucking dicks. Really, it's possible. Using sexual metaphors to describe behavior is what happens in high school. I.E., prior to emotional maturity. And this says nothing about anyone else who might be reading his replies and becoming alienated by how he chooses to communicate, much less the person he's actually responding to. There might have been someone reading that who had a valid point to make but decided they just didn't want to participate in a discussion about dick sucking.
Really, PE binaries and blow jobs have nothing in common, I don't talk to my girlfriend about PE binaries if she's giving me a blow job, and there's no reason that Linus needs to talk about blow jobs in a discussion of PE binaries.
It's not as though it was a personal insult either.
Yes, it is. Saying "this isn't a dick-sucking contest" does sort of imply that you think the people are sucking dicks, doesn't it? It sort of discourages any kind of rational discourse on the actual topic.
Furthermore, the term 'deep-throating microsoft' *was* very to the point. I challenge you to express the same disgust of the proposed patch in a more civilized manner which would also make it immediately clear how disgusted you are.
"I am thoroughly disgusted by even considering this change and will never allow it into the kernel." After all, he has absolute say over what goes in. It's pretty easy to lay down the law without talking about erect penises inside throats, but it does require a certain level of emotional maturity I suppose.
I don't think that anyone is saying that Linux is in trouble (other than possibly Netcraft, of course). People are just saying that they don't want to work with Linus any more, and they don't want to work in that kind of environment. Garrett is forking the kernel, not abandoning it. He's going to do his own thing without having to hear Linus talk about dick sucking. Other kernel developers who also don't want to hear Linus talk about dick sucking may choose to join Garrett also, but Linux as a project isn't in trouble. That is despite Linus' behavior though, not because of it.
No, you don't have it straight yet, I don't think you will either. It's like I'm trying to describe what a scenery looks like and you're arguing about which cheese is better. Have a great day.
This may or may not be an issue depending on his goals.
Well, it is an issue, it's the issue that I'm talking about. It's the issue that is the subject of the thread to which you're replying. I don't care if he personally sees it as an issue or not. I'm not talking about that.
Business leaders? Why don't you bring up a list of greatest astronauts and show Linus doesn't show up in the list. Or the greatest farmers? Or the fastest runners? People with ears of sharpest hearing? That would have as much relevance as this - which is unknown. Unknown because the goal is not known. If the goal were to become fastest sprinters, he has failed miserably for all I know. If the goal is to be (one of) the greatest business leaders, he has failed according to forbes etc.
You are spiraling out of control. This is what you said:
Linus will be known as one of the most successful people/self/time/resource "managers" alive in 2015.
Do you have any evidence that what you say there is anything more than just your opinion? Is Linus on any list that you can cite that would help back up your claim? Stick the the point.
Is his goal to minimize the people getting fed up of him?
HIS GOAL IS TO MANAGE A SOFTWARE PROJECT. THIS IS WHAT HE DOES. IF THAT IS NOT HIS GOAL, THEN HE IS WASTING HIS TIME.
WTF man, this is a discussion about whether or not the LKML is a hostile environment (which it is), based largely on the poor behavior of Linus and other senior maintainers (which it is), and you're going off on some random abstract tangent about personal goals. He is the self-proclaimed "benevolent dictator" of Linux, he is the only person with absolute authority to decide which changes get merged. And you want to go off on some random tangent about personal goals? HIS GOAL IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF LINUX. This is not a secret!
And you hereby order Linus to have this goal of being on a list of the best software project managers?
OK, I'm done with this conversation. Have a great day.
You don't blame Linus? When people are talking about signing and parsing PE binaries, and whether that belongs in the kernel or in userland, you think that it's perfectly acceptable to talk about sucking dicks? That's effective management to you?
I mean, why can't Linus just make his point without multiple references to sucking dicks? Why is that not an option?
That's the point he's making. He's not talking about whether or not Linus is correct, he's talking about the way in which Linus chooses to communicate.
Probably. Or else his goal could be to get great software created and made useful and available to lot of people, in which he is one of the most successful people ever.
The issue is not whether or not he is successful, the issue is whether or not people want to work with him based on his management style (or lack thereof).
Linus will be known as one of the most successful people/self/time/resource "managers" alive in 2015.
"An effective manager isn't tyrannical. They don't command unnecessarily, micromanage, or instill fear. A successful manager can be approachable, amicable, or even downright compassionate. These managers lead teams of satisfied employees, which reduces turnover and boosts morale and productivity."
Here's a question for you: if Linus is such a fantastic manager, then why are there so many stories about people getting fed up with the behavior of him and others on the LKML and deciding to leave? Why is the LKML known as an abusive place? Does that sound like the result of a great manager?
That graphic lists several qualities cited by employees as the most important component of the manager-employee relationship. Those qualities are trust, fairness, patience, respect, and open communication. I'll grant that the LKML is probably pretty good at open communication, although even that is arguable. Those other qualities are absent from the management in the LKML.
Linus can be found on various lists of most influential, but I'll challenge you to find him on a list of the best software project managers.
And you are the ultimate authority on what Linus Torvalds needs or wants. Got it.
Reading is about more than just recognizing words, my friend. Look at the meaning in the words in my last couple paragraphs, where I say he's free to do whatever he wants, he just has to deal with the consequences. If his major work goal is working from home in his bathrobe while yelling at people, great, he's going to attract workers who want a boss who works in his bathrobe from home and yells at people. I'm not saying he has to change anything, but he also doesn't have any right to complain about the quality of people that he works with.
Are you better? Make more difference to the world than Linus did, and you might have a "good argument" to be made that you are better.
Linus did not make his contributions to the world based on the strength of his management skills. His contributions came from other skills. Yes, I very well might be a better manager than him.
Then you will find that there are very few people alive who are better "managers" than Linus.
That statement is laughable. Being able to delegate and being a good manager are completely different things.
That's exactly what Linus *doesn't* want. "How to Win Friends and Influence People" is all about manipulating people, stroking their ego and trying to act in a way so that they like you.
So that they like you? Wrong, it's about being able to identify what you need to say and do to a particular person in order to get that person what you need or want them to do. In other words, management, influence (it's right there in the title!). It's about how to effectively lead a group of people that each have their own personal needs. You identify the needs they have, what motivates or de-motivates them, and apply that to get them to effectively do their job as part of the team. It's exactly what being a manager or team leader is all about. In practice the bad managers are the ones who don't understand how to do that. There is a very good argument to be made that Linus is a very bad manager.
For example, I'm a developer and I have zero interest in getting involved with the Linux kernel specifically because I don't want to be yelled at while I'm learning the thing. I have other things I could be doing than getting yelled at while I'm trying to learn something. I studied the architecture of it in college (we had an entire class specifically on the kernel code), and I was interested to see how it worked and how they chose to solve various problems, but I have no interest in trying to actually engage with the people who would sooner tear me down than answer my questions or point me in the right direction.
It's not a work environment I want any part of, so Linus is free to refuse to do anything based on being able to work in his bathrobe from home, but in the end he's only going to attract the kind of people who want to work in their bathrobe from home. I'm not one of those people, shit I don't even own a bathrobe. It's like the women I know who have trouble finding a good guy, and decide to dress like a whore (I say this with the utmost respect for these women, it's a term they freely and jokingly use to describe their own outfits) and go hang out in bars. If that's how they dress and that's where they hang out, then they're only going to attract a guy looking for those qualities (which, incidentally, is not the kind of guy they really want). The same goes for Linus, he's only going to attract the kind of people who think that sitting in a bathrobe at home yelling at people is just the thing for them. That's great, but there are a lot of us who want more from our relationships, and Sarah Sharp, like my single female friends, is apparently one of those people.
The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways.
I'm split on whether Linus' logical fallacy is the slippery slope, or black and white. Apparently he thinks that putting on a tie and not calling co-workers names will always lead to what he's describing. The fact is that a lot of people manage to treat their co-workers with respect without resorting to lying, backstabbing, and passive-aggressive behavior. Linux is only saying that he's incapable of doing that. It's his failure personally, not a failure of being professional.
According to the pictures, the chairs in the Nissan are quite solid and stationary (and without any sort of cushioning, apparently). The picture at the bottom of the article that shows the inward-facing seats is the Mercedes F015.
I understand that. But what are the people who are abusing this technology doing? They're showing ads. Like any other technology that comes along, sure enough there's an advertiser trying to use it to show people stuff that they don't want to see. This is the reason why we need ad-blockers, and it's something that advertisers arguing against blocking don't seem to want to admit.
How about this: the next time there's an article where advertisers or so-called "content providers" bitch and moan about people blocking ads, we can use this story as more evidence to show that malware authors are the colleagues of advertisers. Advertisers might not like that fact, but it's a fact. Ad blocking is akin to malware blocking.
There you go, there's the anti-advertising gripe for your "both sides".
You're asking factual questions without doing the research, not trying to open a discussion on people's opinions. This isn't an argument, either, there's nothing to be right about or to win.
The article doesn't mention a job, although I previously heard that he had started working for a web development company. That might be incorrect. It claims speaking fees are his primary source of income.
They have no legal authority to levy a fine on someone who didn't consent to be a part of their "service" in the first place. People being rated are not their customers, advertisers are their customers.
Apple pulled the app as well. Their justification was that we had taken "actions that may hinder the performance or intended use of the App Store, B2B Program, or the Program."
A suitably vague justification from Apple. Obviously the existing app did not hinder the performance or use of the app store.
While the process to buy one is kind of a pain until the company figures out their manufacture and supply issues, look at OnePlus for your next phone. The phones are not tied to any carrier, you own them outright and they sell them dirt cheap for very low margins (hence the complete lack of spare inventory standing by for you to purchase). I have a OnePlus One that is almost a year old and it's currently running Android 5.1.1 (shipped with 4.4.4 I think) plus Cyanogenmod. The current phones are running their proprietary OxygenOS instead of CM because of licensing deals gone wrong, but I would still expect regular updates from the manufacturer regardless of carrier. Just do your research to make sure it's going to work on your carrier in your country.
I believe that libstagefright in Android is the module that makes it possible to see a preview of certain MMS messages. So, if someone sends me a picture, and I open the messages app, next to their name in the conversations list I see part of the picture they sent, and of course if I click on the conversation I'll see the whole thing. I believe that libstagefright is what makes that little preview in the conversation list possible. I'm not sure why the developers chose to call that library stagefright though.
Slashdot Mirror
Like I described several posts ago, IF his behavior drives off good developers who don't want to be yelled at, THEN he can't really complain about not having good developers. That's what all of these words mean:
Look at the meaning in the words in my last couple paragraphs, where I say he's free to do whatever he wants, he just has to deal with the consequences. If his major work goal is working from home in his bathrobe while yelling at people, great, he's going to attract workers who want a boss who works in his bathrobe from home and yells at people. I'm not saying he has to change anything, but he also doesn't have any right to complain about the quality of people that he works with.
It would be like me walking into a fancy bar full of beautiful women while wearing a shirt that says "Show Me Your Tits" and then complaining that no women want to talk to me. I don't really have much of a right to complain about that if I'm being blatantly offensive towards them, do I? Linus can do whatever he wants (and, clearly, he does), but if his behavior drives off talented developers then he has no one to blame but himself. That's my point. He doesn't have to change. I don't care if he does change. He just needs to live with the consequences of his behavior, like everyone else. Some people choose to behave professionally so they can work with other professionals, other people decide to behave however the fuck they want, dick sucking and all, and be surrounded by whoever wants to put up with that. I don't really care which of those Linus chooses, I'm just stating which one I would choose, and I also think that his criticisms of what it means to be a professional are completely wrong.
Same reason you have a right to argue with me.
I'm not particularly offended, I just think he can communicate better. I have very little skin in the game regarding kernel development, as long as it works I'm happy. I just try to see it from their point of view, if I brought up features in a development meeting and people start accusing me of sucking dicks. It wouldn't fly, those people wouldn't be in the next meeting. If it's obviously said in jest then that's one thing, but if someone is so irritated by my idea that they start talking about dick sucking instead of any sort of coherent response then I'm not going to have them in the next design meeting, and if they aren't in the design meetings then they might as well not work here.
To me he seems like average Finns are, straight to the point and not affraid to tell someone they are an idiot if they actually are. If anyone actually gets insulted from such mild "abuse" they need a thicker skin.
I don't have a problem telling an idiot that they're an idiot. But there's just no reason to bring up sucking dicks in a technical discussion. I get that he's exasperated trying to explain his position, but all he has to do is clearly explain it once and then link people to that explanation instead of taking the time to respond to everyone individually.
"Bow down to", "serve", "give the keys to", "surrender freedom to" etc. Any number of terms that do a much better job of describing what is literally happening.
BTW, I'm a computer engineer with 40 years programming experience doing kernel/drivers/realtime. There is no good technical reason for Linux to use PE format binaries for applications. Even if you could load them into userland, they can't run because the ABI is different. The are radically less useful as a format for loadable kernel modules.
What would a developer say/think if you told them that before they could publish [or even load] their kernel driver/module, they would have to submit it to Microsoft, wait five days to get it signed, before they could begin testing. Make a one line change to the source and recompile. Now resubmit and wait another five days ... It is this nightmare scenario that prompted the comment and the idea is so bad
Sweet Jesus, all of that justification for why it shouldn't be implemented without a single reference to fellatio. I suppose it really can be done. I agree with what you say and how you say it. This is a good example of the way professionals should communicate with each other. It doesn't really need to be repeated either, once the justification is posted then any further discussion can just link to the already-posted justification.
This is totally off-topic, but why do I see so many people refer to it as "Visual Studios"? It's not plural, and I don't think it ever has been, where does that come from?
Are you homophobic?
Why, because only homosexual people suck dicks? Believe it or not, but I actually know several heterosexual people who do in fact enjoy sucking dicks, and I think they're great people. No, I'm not homophobic, and this has nothing to do with sexuality. See what happens? The topic was parsing PE binaries, and now you're asking me if I'm homophobic. That kind of highlights the exact problem that we're talking about. Sexuality and sexual acts do not belong in a professional discussion about technical issues that have zero to do with sexuality.
There is nothing wrong with suck*ng d!cks or any other d!ck metaphor.
If there's nothing wrong with it then why are you self-censoring the phrase "sucking dicks"?
For instance he can use sexual metaphors without it becoming a massive issue for him.
I don't think that's really a sign of emotional maturity. I think a sign of emotional maturity is not automatically going to sexual metaphors to try and get your point across. A mature communicator can make his disagreement clear without accusing the other party of sucking dicks. Really, it's possible. Using sexual metaphors to describe behavior is what happens in high school. I.E., prior to emotional maturity. And this says nothing about anyone else who might be reading his replies and becoming alienated by how he chooses to communicate, much less the person he's actually responding to. There might have been someone reading that who had a valid point to make but decided they just didn't want to participate in a discussion about dick sucking.
Really, PE binaries and blow jobs have nothing in common, I don't talk to my girlfriend about PE binaries if she's giving me a blow job, and there's no reason that Linus needs to talk about blow jobs in a discussion of PE binaries.
It's not as though it was a personal insult either.
Yes, it is. Saying "this isn't a dick-sucking contest" does sort of imply that you think the people are sucking dicks, doesn't it? It sort of discourages any kind of rational discourse on the actual topic.
Furthermore, the term 'deep-throating microsoft' *was* very to the point. I challenge you to express the same disgust of the proposed patch in a more civilized manner which would also make it immediately clear how disgusted you are.
"I am thoroughly disgusted by even considering this change and will never allow it into the kernel." After all, he has absolute say over what goes in. It's pretty easy to lay down the law without talking about erect penises inside throats, but it does require a certain level of emotional maturity I suppose.
I don't think that anyone is saying that Linux is in trouble (other than possibly Netcraft, of course). People are just saying that they don't want to work with Linus any more, and they don't want to work in that kind of environment. Garrett is forking the kernel, not abandoning it. He's going to do his own thing without having to hear Linus talk about dick sucking. Other kernel developers who also don't want to hear Linus talk about dick sucking may choose to join Garrett also, but Linux as a project isn't in trouble. That is despite Linus' behavior though, not because of it.
No, you don't have it straight yet, I don't think you will either. It's like I'm trying to describe what a scenery looks like and you're arguing about which cheese is better. Have a great day.
This may or may not be an issue depending on his goals.
Well, it is an issue, it's the issue that I'm talking about. It's the issue that is the subject of the thread to which you're replying. I don't care if he personally sees it as an issue or not. I'm not talking about that.
Business leaders? Why don't you bring up a list of greatest astronauts and show Linus doesn't show up in the list. Or the greatest farmers? Or the fastest runners? People with ears of sharpest hearing? That would have as much relevance as this - which is unknown. Unknown because the goal is not known. If the goal were to become fastest sprinters, he has failed miserably for all I know. If the goal is to be (one of) the greatest business leaders, he has failed according to forbes etc.
You are spiraling out of control. This is what you said:
Linus will be known as one of the most successful people/self/time/resource "managers" alive in 2015.
Do you have any evidence that what you say there is anything more than just your opinion? Is Linus on any list that you can cite that would help back up your claim? Stick the the point.
Is his goal to minimize the people getting fed up of him?
HIS GOAL IS TO MANAGE A SOFTWARE PROJECT. THIS IS WHAT HE DOES. IF THAT IS NOT HIS GOAL, THEN HE IS WASTING HIS TIME.
WTF man, this is a discussion about whether or not the LKML is a hostile environment (which it is), based largely on the poor behavior of Linus and other senior maintainers (which it is), and you're going off on some random abstract tangent about personal goals. He is the self-proclaimed "benevolent dictator" of Linux, he is the only person with absolute authority to decide which changes get merged. And you want to go off on some random tangent about personal goals? HIS GOAL IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF LINUX. This is not a secret!
And you hereby order Linus to have this goal of being on a list of the best software project managers?
OK, I'm done with this conversation. Have a great day.
You don't blame Linus? When people are talking about signing and parsing PE binaries, and whether that belongs in the kernel or in userland, you think that it's perfectly acceptable to talk about sucking dicks? That's effective management to you?
I mean, why can't Linus just make his point without multiple references to sucking dicks? Why is that not an option?
That's the point he's making. He's not talking about whether or not Linus is correct, he's talking about the way in which Linus chooses to communicate.
Probably. Or else his goal could be to get great software created and made useful and available to lot of people, in which he is one of the most successful people ever.
The issue is not whether or not he is successful, the issue is whether or not people want to work with him based on his management style (or lack thereof).
Linus will be known as one of the most successful people/self/time/resource "managers" alive in 2015.
100% of that statement is your opinion.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/da...
http://www.business-management...
Here's an interesting graphic:
https://www.themuse.com/advice...
From the very top:
"An effective manager isn't tyrannical. They don't command unnecessarily, micromanage, or instill fear. A successful manager can be approachable, amicable, or even downright compassionate. These managers lead teams of satisfied employees, which reduces turnover and boosts morale and productivity."
Here's a question for you: if Linus is such a fantastic manager, then why are there so many stories about people getting fed up with the behavior of him and others on the LKML and deciding to leave? Why is the LKML known as an abusive place? Does that sound like the result of a great manager?
That graphic lists several qualities cited by employees as the most important component of the manager-employee relationship. Those qualities are trust, fairness, patience, respect, and open communication. I'll grant that the LKML is probably pretty good at open communication, although even that is arguable. Those other qualities are absent from the management in the LKML.
Linus can be found on various lists of most influential, but I'll challenge you to find him on a list of the best software project managers.
And you are the ultimate authority on what Linus Torvalds needs or wants. Got it.
Reading is about more than just recognizing words, my friend. Look at the meaning in the words in my last couple paragraphs, where I say he's free to do whatever he wants, he just has to deal with the consequences. If his major work goal is working from home in his bathrobe while yelling at people, great, he's going to attract workers who want a boss who works in his bathrobe from home and yells at people. I'm not saying he has to change anything, but he also doesn't have any right to complain about the quality of people that he works with.
Are you better? Make more difference to the world than Linus did, and you might have a "good argument" to be made that you are better.
Linus did not make his contributions to the world based on the strength of his management skills. His contributions came from other skills. Yes, I very well might be a better manager than him.
Then you will find that there are very few people alive who are better "managers" than Linus.
That statement is laughable. Being able to delegate and being a good manager are completely different things.
That's exactly what Linus *doesn't* want. "How to Win Friends and Influence People" is all about manipulating people, stroking their ego and trying to act in a way so that they like you.
So that they like you? Wrong, it's about being able to identify what you need to say and do to a particular person in order to get that person what you need or want them to do. In other words, management, influence (it's right there in the title!). It's about how to effectively lead a group of people that each have their own personal needs. You identify the needs they have, what motivates or de-motivates them, and apply that to get them to effectively do their job as part of the team. It's exactly what being a manager or team leader is all about. In practice the bad managers are the ones who don't understand how to do that. There is a very good argument to be made that Linus is a very bad manager.
For example, I'm a developer and I have zero interest in getting involved with the Linux kernel specifically because I don't want to be yelled at while I'm learning the thing. I have other things I could be doing than getting yelled at while I'm trying to learn something. I studied the architecture of it in college (we had an entire class specifically on the kernel code), and I was interested to see how it worked and how they chose to solve various problems, but I have no interest in trying to actually engage with the people who would sooner tear me down than answer my questions or point me in the right direction.
It's not a work environment I want any part of, so Linus is free to refuse to do anything based on being able to work in his bathrobe from home, but in the end he's only going to attract the kind of people who want to work in their bathrobe from home. I'm not one of those people, shit I don't even own a bathrobe. It's like the women I know who have trouble finding a good guy, and decide to dress like a whore (I say this with the utmost respect for these women, it's a term they freely and jokingly use to describe their own outfits) and go hang out in bars. If that's how they dress and that's where they hang out, then they're only going to attract a guy looking for those qualities (which, incidentally, is not the kind of guy they really want). The same goes for Linus, he's only going to attract the kind of people who think that sitting in a bathrobe at home yelling at people is just the thing for them. That's great, but there are a lot of us who want more from our relationships, and Sarah Sharp, like my single female friends, is apparently one of those people.
The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways.
I'm split on whether Linus' logical fallacy is the slippery slope, or black and white. Apparently he thinks that putting on a tie and not calling co-workers names will always lead to what he's describing. The fact is that a lot of people manage to treat their co-workers with respect without resorting to lying, backstabbing, and passive-aggressive behavior. Linux is only saying that he's incapable of doing that. It's his failure personally, not a failure of being professional.
According to the pictures, the chairs in the Nissan are quite solid and stationary (and without any sort of cushioning, apparently). The picture at the bottom of the article that shows the inward-facing seats is the Mercedes F015.
I understand that. But what are the people who are abusing this technology doing? They're showing ads. Like any other technology that comes along, sure enough there's an advertiser trying to use it to show people stuff that they don't want to see. This is the reason why we need ad-blockers, and it's something that advertisers arguing against blocking don't seem to want to admit.
How about this: the next time there's an article where advertisers or so-called "content providers" bitch and moan about people blocking ads, we can use this story as more evidence to show that malware authors are the colleagues of advertisers. Advertisers might not like that fact, but it's a fact. Ad blocking is akin to malware blocking.
There you go, there's the anti-advertising gripe for your "both sides".
You're asking factual questions without doing the research, not trying to open a discussion on people's opinions. This isn't an argument, either, there's nothing to be right about or to win.
See for yourself:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The article doesn't mention a job, although I previously heard that he had started working for a web development company. That might be incorrect. It claims speaking fees are his primary source of income.
They have no legal authority to levy a fine on someone who didn't consent to be a part of their "service" in the first place. People being rated are not their customers, advertisers are their customers.
Apple pulled the app as well. Their justification was that we had taken "actions that may hinder the performance or intended use of the App Store, B2B Program, or the Program."
A suitably vague justification from Apple. Obviously the existing app did not hinder the performance or use of the app store.
While the process to buy one is kind of a pain until the company figures out their manufacture and supply issues, look at OnePlus for your next phone. The phones are not tied to any carrier, you own them outright and they sell them dirt cheap for very low margins (hence the complete lack of spare inventory standing by for you to purchase). I have a OnePlus One that is almost a year old and it's currently running Android 5.1.1 (shipped with 4.4.4 I think) plus Cyanogenmod. The current phones are running their proprietary OxygenOS instead of CM because of licensing deals gone wrong, but I would still expect regular updates from the manufacturer regardless of carrier. Just do your research to make sure it's going to work on your carrier in your country.
I believe that libstagefright in Android is the module that makes it possible to see a preview of certain MMS messages. So, if someone sends me a picture, and I open the messages app, next to their name in the conversations list I see part of the picture they sent, and of course if I click on the conversation I'll see the whole thing. I believe that libstagefright is what makes that little preview in the conversation list possible. I'm not sure why the developers chose to call that library stagefright though.