To be fair Axanar was a scam. It might have been good anyway, but the guy behind it was basically using the opportunity to build himself a studio with the Kickstarter money.
There are real fan efforts out there, like Star Trek Continues, that are both excellent and done right (as a registered charity).
This won't be used for consumer stuff, it's way too expensive and too bandwidth limited. They won't be able to deliver ads to your fridge over satellite. That will use your wifi.
This is for stuff like monitoring pipelines and remote parts of the environment. Drone ships at sea.
A waste of time. It makes people learn everyone else's pronouns instead of learning the patch they're submitting.
So, before the CoC, how did people address each other on the LKML? I can see a lot of pronouns like "he" and "her", but somehow now it's worse because..?
Simply wrong, no one should take personal viewpoints and experiences into account when evaluating a pull request. It should be evaluated purely on its technical merit.
So when Linus said that the Gnome preferences panel was crap in his experience, re-wrote it and submitted a patch, that was wrong? His personal experience and views on it's usability should be ignored, the only thing that needs evaluating is the technical merits of the patch?
How about checking first whether the criticism has merit?
Okay, say it doesn't have merit... You could offer some constructive meta-criticism. I'm not sure what your problem is here, the CoC is saying you shouldn't be hostile to genuine attempts to provide helpful criticism, it doesn't preclude disagreeing.
What should the community do with a mentally disabled person? Should they be made to feel welcome despite spamming every discussion with kindergarten-level understanding?
Note how it doesn't say "if you have some kind of disability the rules don't apply to you".
Having said that this CoC only applies to people using official Linux Foundation channels, so it's not clear how such a person would ever gain access to an official email address or social media account.
Perhaps you have a point about the list. You could submit a patch re-wording it to a more general statement.
Eating shrimp is offensive to wahhabists.
But note that there is recourse beyond the project maintainer and that punishing someone for eating shrimp would doubtless be a violation of the CoC itself and result in sanctions.
If you actually listen to the most prominent "white supremacists" these days, none of them advocate violence.
Are you really that naive?
Of course they don't advocate violence directly, because they are trying to make their views more acceptable to the mainstream. But of course their supporters know what they really mean. None of them seriously think that the goal is to turn the US into a racially pure ethnostate by peaceful means, where somehow all the non-whites will be convinced to peacefully leave.
Did you see the video of the Unite the Right rally? The one made by the James Allsup? He took it down by you can still see large parts of it here: https://youtu.be/zcoYKuoiUrY
Notice how he consistently celebrates the Nazis at the rally, and then adds "disavow!" at the end because at least for PR reasons he wants to pretend that the doesn't support them and that they were just a small minority of the attendees.
Notice how he sights misogynistic, homophobic and transphobic behaviour as examples of things he considers bad. And note how he also states that he regrets some of his past public statements, not because of how they are perceived but because he recognizes the problems with them.
The latter part you quoted is just him talking about how he was reluctant to openly state that such behaviour was unacceptable previously because people would accuse him of being a politically correct SJW, but that equally not saying anything is a statement in itself and that statement has associations with nationalists who think their views should be more widely accepted and tolerated.
Maybe the trick is to not treat all external statements as coming from "they" and instead evaluate who is actually saying these things and the case they make to back it up.
Maybe we don't need a Saturn V. If smaller rockets are much, much cheaper we can do multiple launches and assemble in-orbit. Saturn V was only necessary because in-orbit assembly was seen as infeasible at the time.
We can only infer from the price of cars using their packs, but consider this. Hyundai/Kia will give you a top spec car with 70kWh battery for a lot less money than a stripped down base Model 3 with 50kWh battery. Additionally we can see the price difference between the PHEV versions and EV versions of the Hyundai/Kia cars, which gives us a pretty good indication of the battery cost.
LG and SK Innovation have gone a different route, with pouch cells of the type found in phones for automotive use. They are cheaper and higher energy density and it shows with significantly lower costs then Panasonic right now.
As I already pointed out, he is relevant because he made the same argument with the same pseudo-scientific explanation and so the rebuttal of that is relevant. While court cases are of course not a substitute for science, the court will examine the science and decide if Damore's interpretation is reasonable.
Anyway, I dispute your claim. We can't talk about him, even on stories about him anything suggesting that he might be wrong is modded as flamebait.
Right. On the one hand they accuse people of being Nazis and destroy them, forcing them out of high profile projects that adopt a CoC. On the other you don't know a single one of them, don't know the projects affected, don't even know what to google to find out.
It's pretty toxic that we can't even talk about the guy, especially when other people are making the exact same mistake he made.
Is that really where we are at now, with topics so offensive and enraging that they have to be completely off limits? We can talk about all sorts of controversial stuff, just not Mr. James Damore?
Your signature is very apt. All these arguments come down to the same nonsense - you haven't read it, it will be abused by the SJWs who definitely exist, there's a conspiracy and they got to Linus... Of course everyone knows this, so no evidence is required, which is lucky because we don't have any. Stop asking about it, troll.
Well, there are certainly people that will accuse you of being white and straight and try to make you feel guilty for it.
So people keep saying, and apparently there are lots of them everywhere, so perhaps you could tell me specifically whom. From the way they are described I presume they are running some powerful organizations.
How about one name I can google? Just one person who thinks people should feel guilty for being white and straight.
It doesn't seem unreasonable for a man who decided to make his own operating system to make his own code of conduct for that project.
I imagine the fact that he checked himself in for some therapy after realizing what an ass he had been probably made him question his own ability to write a Code of Conduct.
Why do we even have to know the sexual orientation, gender or race of programmers and engineers?
It can be hard to avoid knowing it unless you mandate blindfolds at all Linux events, and ban anyone submitting patches who also happens to have photos or social media online. Contributors will have to be careful to avoid letting information leak, e.g. when they can't work on something this weekend because it's their brother's bar mitzvah.
Oh and of course anyone using a language that has gendered pronouns, e.g. Spanish, is banned unless they agree to always speak English at all times. And of course English speakers should be careful to use "they/them" at all times too.
Anyone with a work address in the format firstname.lastname@ had better sign up for an anonymous hotmail account with gender, race and age neutral username. Ideally just numbers, 6847631@hotmail.com won't reveal any potentially problematic info about you. Just remember not to sign your mails off "Regards, Linus" or something stupid like that.
Maybe you could write all this up into a Code of Conduct.
For the record, I will condemn that attitude here and now. If I ever meet someone like that, I'll criticise their argument.
What's weird is that people tell me I'm on the far left, practically a communist, and yet I don't know any people like that. You would think I'd bump into them all the time, given how prevalent they are and how they apparently run everything.
Because I may have my reservations about excessive political correctness, but honestly, I absolutely do not want to be seen as being in the same camp as the low-life scum on the internet that think it's OK to be a white nationalist Nazi
In other words he decided that he couldn't sit on the fence any more, because doing and saying nothing was effectively the 4chan option where anything goes, and it's fine to be a Nazi. He is not saying he is worried about being called a Nazi, he is saying that he doesn't want to give the impression that anything goes behaviour and content-wise on official Linux channels.
In TFA he is talking about not wanting to sound like the Nazis and white supremacists on the internet, always complaining about snowflakes and telling people to man up while they spew vitriol and anger at them.
Like it or not, that "just be less of a wuss, snowflake" attitude has become associated with some pretty awful people. Ironically by exercising their freedom of speech to say that sort of thing it's apparently discouraged (or "censored" in newspeak) Linus.
So if I decided I don't like Linus' tone I can just mute him and still contribute to the kernel, right? Someone will re-write his critiques of my code and forward it on to me.
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair Axanar was a scam. It might have been good anyway, but the guy behind it was basically using the opportunity to build himself a studio with the Kickstarter money.
There are real fan efforts out there, like Star Trek Continues, that are both excellent and done right (as a registered charity).
This won't be used for consumer stuff, it's way too expensive and too bandwidth limited. They won't be able to deliver ads to your fridge over satellite. That will use your wifi.
This is for stuff like monitoring pipelines and remote parts of the environment. Drone ships at sea.
A waste of time. It makes people learn everyone else's pronouns instead of learning the patch they're submitting.
So, before the CoC, how did people address each other on the LKML? I can see a lot of pronouns like "he" and "her", but somehow now it's worse because..?
Simply wrong, no one should take personal viewpoints and experiences into account when evaluating a pull request. It should be evaluated purely on its technical merit.
So when Linus said that the Gnome preferences panel was crap in his experience, re-wrote it and submitted a patch, that was wrong? His personal experience and views on it's usability should be ignored, the only thing that needs evaluating is the technical merits of the patch?
How about checking first whether the criticism has merit?
Okay, say it doesn't have merit... You could offer some constructive meta-criticism. I'm not sure what your problem is here, the CoC is saying you shouldn't be hostile to genuine attempts to provide helpful criticism, it doesn't preclude disagreeing.
What should the community do with a mentally disabled person? Should they be made to feel welcome despite spamming every discussion with kindergarten-level understanding?
Note how it doesn't say "if you have some kind of disability the rules don't apply to you".
Having said that this CoC only applies to people using official Linux Foundation channels, so it's not clear how such a person would ever gain access to an official email address or social media account.
Perhaps you have a point about the list. You could submit a patch re-wording it to a more general statement.
Eating shrimp is offensive to wahhabists.
But note that there is recourse beyond the project maintainer and that punishing someone for eating shrimp would doubtless be a violation of the CoC itself and result in sanctions.
If you actually listen to the most prominent "white supremacists" these days, none of them advocate violence.
Are you really that naive?
Of course they don't advocate violence directly, because they are trying to make their views more acceptable to the mainstream. But of course their supporters know what they really mean. None of them seriously think that the goal is to turn the US into a racially pure ethnostate by peaceful means, where somehow all the non-whites will be convinced to peacefully leave.
Did you see the video of the Unite the Right rally? The one made by the James Allsup? He took it down by you can still see large parts of it here: https://youtu.be/zcoYKuoiUrY
Notice how he consistently celebrates the Nazis at the rally, and then adds "disavow!" at the end because at least for PR reasons he wants to pretend that the doesn't support them and that they were just a small minority of the attendees.
Notice how he sights misogynistic, homophobic and transphobic behaviour as examples of things he considers bad. And note how he also states that he regrets some of his past public statements, not because of how they are perceived but because he recognizes the problems with them.
The latter part you quoted is just him talking about how he was reluctant to openly state that such behaviour was unacceptable previously because people would accuse him of being a politically correct SJW, but that equally not saying anything is a statement in itself and that statement has associations with nationalists who think their views should be more widely accepted and tolerated.
Maybe the trick is to not treat all external statements as coming from "they" and instead evaluate who is actually saying these things and the case they make to back it up.
Or just delete his Twitter account.
The fraud, the accusations of paedophilia, the unfulfilled promises to Tesla owners... They all come from his tweets.
Maybe we don't need a Saturn V. If smaller rockets are much, much cheaper we can do multiple launches and assemble in-orbit. Saturn V was only necessary because in-orbit assembly was seen as infeasible at the time.
You think that citing the authors of the studies he cites as his evidence is cherry picking?
We can only infer from the price of cars using their packs, but consider this. Hyundai/Kia will give you a top spec car with 70kWh battery for a lot less money than a stripped down base Model 3 with 50kWh battery. Additionally we can see the price difference between the PHEV versions and EV versions of the Hyundai/Kia cars, which gives us a pretty good indication of the battery cost.
LG and SK Innovation have gone a different route, with pouch cells of the type found in phones for automotive use. They are cheaper and higher energy density and it shows with significantly lower costs then Panasonic right now.
As I already pointed out, he is relevant because he made the same argument with the same pseudo-scientific explanation and so the rebuttal of that is relevant. While court cases are of course not a substitute for science, the court will examine the science and decide if Damore's interpretation is reasonable.
Anyway, I dispute your claim. We can't talk about him, even on stories about him anything suggesting that he might be wrong is modded as flamebait.
Right. On the one hand they accuse people of being Nazis and destroy them, forcing them out of high profile projects that adopt a CoC. On the other you don't know a single one of them, don't know the projects affected, don't even know what to google to find out.
It's pretty toxic that we can't even talk about the guy, especially when other people are making the exact same mistake he made.
Is that really where we are at now, with topics so offensive and enraging that they have to be completely off limits? We can talk about all sorts of controversial stuff, just not Mr. James Damore?
Well, fuck that, I've got karma to burn.
Your signature is very apt. All these arguments come down to the same nonsense - you haven't read it, it will be abused by the SJWs who definitely exist, there's a conspiracy and they got to Linus... Of course everyone knows this, so no evidence is required, which is lucky because we don't have any. Stop asking about it, troll.
In practice people just get pissed off and walk away to work on something else, and the Linux project loses good developers.
Well, there are certainly people that will accuse you of being white and straight and try to make you feel guilty for it.
So people keep saying, and apparently there are lots of them everywhere, so perhaps you could tell me specifically whom. From the way they are described I presume they are running some powerful organizations.
How about one name I can google? Just one person who thinks people should feel guilty for being white and straight.
It doesn't seem unreasonable for a man who decided to make his own operating system to make his own code of conduct for that project.
I imagine the fact that he checked himself in for some therapy after realizing what an ass he had been probably made him question his own ability to write a Code of Conduct.
Why do we even have to know the sexual orientation, gender or race of programmers and engineers?
It can be hard to avoid knowing it unless you mandate blindfolds at all Linux events, and ban anyone submitting patches who also happens to have photos or social media online. Contributors will have to be careful to avoid letting information leak, e.g. when they can't work on something this weekend because it's their brother's bar mitzvah.
Oh and of course anyone using a language that has gendered pronouns, e.g. Spanish, is banned unless they agree to always speak English at all times. And of course English speakers should be careful to use "they/them" at all times too.
Anyone with a work address in the format firstname.lastname@ had better sign up for an anonymous hotmail account with gender, race and age neutral username. Ideally just numbers, 6847631@hotmail.com won't reveal any potentially problematic info about you. Just remember not to sign your mails off "Regards, Linus" or something stupid like that.
Maybe you could write all this up into a Code of Conduct.
For the record, I will condemn that attitude here and now. If I ever meet someone like that, I'll criticise their argument.
What's weird is that people tell me I'm on the far left, practically a communist, and yet I don't know any people like that. You would think I'd bump into them all the time, given how prevalent they are and how they apparently run everything.
Give the whole quote and it will make more sense:
Because I may have my reservations about excessive political correctness, but honestly, I absolutely do not want to be seen as being in the same camp as the low-life scum on the internet that think it's OK to be a white nationalist Nazi
In other words he decided that he couldn't sit on the fence any more, because doing and saying nothing was effectively the 4chan option where anything goes, and it's fine to be a Nazi. He is not saying he is worried about being called a Nazi, he is saying that he doesn't want to give the impression that anything goes behaviour and content-wise on official Linux channels.
The old "don't make it political" argument is just dog whistle. State exactly what part of the CoC you disagree with.
In TFA he is talking about not wanting to sound like the Nazis and white supremacists on the internet, always complaining about snowflakes and telling people to man up while they spew vitriol and anger at them.
Like it or not, that "just be less of a wuss, snowflake" attitude has become associated with some pretty awful people. Ironically by exercising their freedom of speech to say that sort of thing it's apparently discouraged (or "censored" in newspeak) Linus.
So if I decided I don't like Linus' tone I can just mute him and still contribute to the kernel, right? Someone will re-write his critiques of my code and forward it on to me.
cis-gendered white males
It's funny how the first people to mention cis-gendered white males are always the people complaining about hostility to cis-gendered white males.