HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

You have to understand that the Linux Foundation is using his "rage" as a PR exercise. He was outspoken from the start, even as a kid. His reply to Tanenbaum when he first released the Linux kernel is well know. But the Linux foundation realised that they can capitalise on this "rage" by making it more visible. Any publicity is good publicity, as they say in PR world. Negative news makes more impact than positive news. How many people outside the BSD community know who the lead developers are for BSD OSes? How many of them are interviewed at TED talks[0]? It is all about publicity.

[0] https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

⬐ qalmakka

You may argue that OpenBSD's founder Theo de Raadt is arguably not a shy, calm person either, but that hasn't brought to its project the same amount of mindshare and attention Linux has.

⬐ loloquwowndueo

I know about Theo :) ( though the rage pattern also applies there)

⬐ phekunde

I know about Theo as well even though I am not a user on any of the BSD distribution. And that is my point. I knew about him because there was a discussion about him similar to the discussion that happens on rage of Linus. "Squeaky wheel gets the oil" as they say! In this case oil is publicity.

⬐ foperator

The Linux Foundation does nothing like that. Linus had been famous before its existence.

On the contrary, they made an example of him and had him recant to further the new corporate substitute religion that is used as a worker suppression tool and that solidifies the power of idle bureaucrats.

It’s this one: https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin.... The code he referred is here: https://github.com/mkirchner/linked-list-good-taste

⬐ rramadass

Ah; i had seen the TED talk earlier though i had not looked at the code example in detail.

Thanks for the links.

off topic, I've enjoyed the talk referred to

https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

> Bob: Anything else you want to comment on, either publicly or otherwise?

> Linus: I've never had some "message" that I wanted to spread, so ...

It's a pity that a man with such influence has no message that he wants to spread, but I can somehow understand this respond. My personal take of this quote can refer to another quote from his TED interview[1]:

> I’m an engineer. I’m perfectly happy with all the people who are walking around and just staring at the clouds and looking at the stars and saying, “I want to go there,” but I’m looking at the ground and I want to fix the pothole that’s right in front of me before I fall in.

While I wish such leader can speak for values like democracy or human rights, it is just not possible to happen.

[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

⬐ oraphalous

>While I wish such leader can speak for values like democracy or human rights...

Or maybe people who have no particular expertise in political matters should stop opining so much about them?

And maybe we should stop politicising all aspects of culture and existence. There is so much more to life.

⬐ buzzerbetrayed

Well spoken. I would be perfectly happy never hearing Linus Torvalds opinions on politics.

⬐ alkonaut

There is no feasible way to separate politics from everyday life, and leaving "politics to those who knows about it" isn't really viable. Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending. Because there is a message, even from quiet people. "Not politicising" is a political act and statement as well. There is no dodging politics.

Saying "I just play football, I leave politics to politicians" or "I'm just an engineer, I leave politics to the experts" aren't doing that. They are simply saying "I'm happy with what everyone else with an audience says". And the other people with audiences aren't experts either for the most part.

If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter whether those 1M instagram followers just like to see you do backflips on a bicycle. If have 1M followers you have influence. If you have 10M followers you are a political force. Even if you just ride bikes on instagram.

Saying nothing even remotely political is better than completely screwing up ("Lex Notch"), but it's still the easy way out.

⬐ raxxorrax

> There is no feasible way to separate politics from everyday life, and leaving "politics to those who knows about it" isn't really viable.

I vehemently agree with the second statement but the first is absurd without further establishing what "politics" means in this context.

> If you have listeners you have a responsibility

Not everyone listens to admire a person or to see your own views approved. On the contrary, I don't think popularity or visibility implies responsibility. That would also not hold up to reality, restrict the dialogue and patronizes listeners.

Maybe try to convince people on the merrit of your position without treating them like children.

⬐ gerard2

I would say "politics" is organising the life together in all its aspect. With this definition in mind it is pretty much linked to everyday life, in my opinion. So yeah it is pretty feasible to separate one's enjoyment of a foggy morning to taxes or LGBTQ+ rights. But in a democracy this enjoyment is relevant to the ecological policy of your country for exemple and the opinion " I want less air pollution because I like foggy morning" is for me as justified as the next guy's.

⬐ flukus

> Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending.

They do, their message is usually related to their field of expertise. A good sportsman will act as an example of how to be a good sport, how to conduct yourself when you lose, how to be a good winner, etc. A good OS maintainer will set an example through code and their leadership will show the team what is and isn't acceptable.

> If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter whether those 1M instagram followers just like to see you do backflips on a bicycle. If have 1M followers you have influence. If you have 10M followers you are a political force. Even if you just ride bikes on instagram.

If you've got a million followers watching you do backflips on a bike then your audience is not there to hear your political opinions. It's a recipe to lose most of your audience, even the ones that agree aren't there to listen to it.

Assuming you're American, half the countries politics are the opposite of yours, most of the worlds politics are the opposite of yours. Do you really want to be hearing those peoples opinions all the time? Many of those opinions will be quite hurtful to many people.

⬐ alkonaut

> They do, their message is usually related to their field of expertise. A good sportsman will act as an example of how to be a good sport, how to conduct yourself when you lose, how to be a good winner, etc. A good OS maintainer will set an example through code and their leadership will show the team what is and isn't acceptable.

It's rarely that easy. Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so. The decision will be seen as a political one regardless of whether the person making the decision thinks it is.

The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem, and by no decision of their own (it wasn't their protest!) they are now forced to take a political stance and probably motivate it. There

So in some cases you are lucky and you can "just be an engineer" or "just be an athlete" and the positions you take are harmless and apolitical "I like charities and being a good sport!". But suddenly they will be forced to take positions that are both political and controversial. The audience wasn't there of course to hear Linus Torvalds' views on equality or some footballers stance on politics or racism - but there they are. You can't follow an engineer or a footballer that isn't also a human with opinions you may or may not like. So while it's some times nice to not have to worry about politics in some context - it's always just beneath the surface.

⬐ raxxorrax

> Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so.

Funnily, it would allegedly require me to be active to not accept a code of conduct. I would disagree with that.

These code are nothing new and formerly often called something like netiquette or something. Some guidelines a community agreed upon and could be leveraged for common ground in cases of disagreement.

The difference to modern examples of COCs is certainly that they were mostly not mandated upon users. At that point, they become as interesting to users as terms of services. Somthing not on your mind you pay no attention to.

Since most COCs also include some drivel about strict enforcements, learning processes and other completely unrelated topics, I tend to just passively ignore them.

Many of these are also blatantly lying. What better way to champion inclusivity by banning behaviour deemed inconform? While even underlining that conformity is required? I would require an explaination here.

I wonder why people that tend to argue that everything is political are so keen on my and others conformity? What should I answer to that? Sorry, I cannot comply, I need to champion diversity?

⬐ alkonaut

> it would allegedly require me to be active to not accept a code of conduct. I would disagree with that.

Once you reach a certain amount of attention, the question will be raised, and at that point not adopting an explicit CoC will be met with questions and seen as an active political stance. I don't know if I think that's fair - but it's the way it is.

> I wonder why people that tend to argue that everything is political are so keen on my and others conformity?

I'm not sure who you mean or which conformity you refer to here.

⬐ raxxorrax

True, at that point it is a political issue. And I mean those that would take an issue with not adopting a ruleset that allegedly is mandatory, but isn't really. And yes, that would be my stance against this innocent question.

⬐ Faark

> Many of these are also blatantly lying. What better way to champion inclusivity by banning behaviour deemed inconform? While even underlining that conformity is required? I would require an explaination here.

In case you are actually interested and don't just want to support a certain political position, this could be a quick introduction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

⬐ flukus

> Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so.

A strange example considering codes of conduct are forcing people to become more apolitcal. They force politics into venues were it didn't exist before.

> The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem

Not kneeling is apolitical, it doesn't mean you condone any stance whatsoever.

I'm getting the impression you only want political opinions that you agree with to be shared, s let's take a real political stance that isn't controversial on HN , "Should society accept homosexuality?". For me that's and easy yes and I'm sure most of HN would agree. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you do as well, correct? Well a sizeable chunk of your country (which ever one it is), most of the middle east, most of Asia, most of Africa, most of Eastern Europe and much of the Latin America disagree (https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-ho...). Most of the world disagrees in fact.

Are you telling me you want most of them to be spouting "We shouldn't accept homosexuality" on every video of them doing a backflip on a bike?

⬐ alkonaut

> Not kneeling is apolitical

Is it? Who decides that? The athlete might not even know what political position they are taking. Or they might be seen as taking the opposite position as the one they think they are taking. It's all in the eye of the beholder. As soon as enough people believe that not adopting a CoC or not kneeling IS in fact a political stance/statement - then it also is. At that point, it doesn't matter whether a player says "I don't want to take any political side here so I'll just stand, thanks". It's out of their hands. This is an exaggerated example (the CoC one is more reasonable) but I hope you get my point - whether or not you take a political stance might not even be deliberate, or conscious. Some times it might be better to at least do it consciously then.

⬐ flukus

Now you've expanded the definition of political so much I simply don't care if something is political or not, the word has lost all meaning.

You've also completely avoid my question, do you want the majority of the world who don't think society should accept homosexuality to be voicing their opinions more?

⬐ alkonaut

> You've also completely avoid my question

I didn't understand it tbh, and I still don't...

I don't consider all opinions to have equal value but I do value people being able to express opinions that I disagree with. That doesn't mean someone should be voicing opinions about e.g. homosexuality in a place where it has no relevance (Typical context: a github issue discussion). In those contexts I just expect everyone to be tolerant/inclusive. And as usual "tolerance" does not extend to "acceptance of intolerance".

⬐ flukus

> I didn't understand it tbh, and I still don't...

The point is to highlight your hypocrisy. You say you want influential people to be more overtly political but you really only want people you agree with to be more overtly political.

> That doesn't mean someone should be voicing opinions about e.g. homosexuality in a place where it has no relevance (Typical context: a github issue discussion)

This was my point all along, it seems like you do agree that there is such a thing as being apolitical. So why is context only important now? Why is this political position out of context on a GitHub discussion but in context for a football player or someone doing backflips on a bike?

⬐ Pimpus

> "Not politicising" is a political act and statement as well. There is no dodging politics.

Sigh. Are you posting this Twitter meme seriously or is it a joke? It doesn't even stand up to light intellectual scrutiny.

As for actors, musicians etc blabbering about politics, the things they say tend to be elitist, disconnected and uninformed. Don't think it does the world any good, apart from highlighting just how far removed they are from the common man.

⬐ adrianN

The same can be said for politicians.

⬐ coldtea

>Sigh. Are you posting this Twitter meme seriously or is it a joke? It doesn't even stand up to light intellectual scrutiny.

Actually, far from a Twitter meme, it's a millennia long empirical observation.

It's only the disconnect from power of today's citizen that make them thing they can be uninvolved with politics (and that this doesn't send a political message and have political impact).

The very definition of a citizen was one who was active in politics (the inverse being someone preoccupied with their own private matters, an "idiotis" in Ancient Greek, and the etymology for "idiot").

⬐ Pimpus

> The very definition of a citizen was one who was active in politics (the inverse being someone preoccupied with their own private matters, an "idiotis" in Ancient Greek, and the etymology for "idiot").

Um, OK... but not everything is a political act. It's just a ridiculous meme I see now and again.

⬐ coldtea

Yeah, it's not literally really about everything (e.g. taking a shit) being political, it's about how all kinds of stances are political (even a stance like "I don't care about politics, I focus on my own personal stuff" has political implications).

⬐ throwthrow99

> If you have listeners you have a responsibility

I've noticed the people who make such claims tend to have horrible politics that need a signal boost. There's a reason why you need to latch onto the success of others and resent those who will not play ball. Have fun with that.

@coldtea: If your ideas are so virtuous, you wouldn't need such fervent help. They're not.

⬐ coldtea

>I've noticed the people who make such claims tend to have horrible politics that need a signal boost.

And people who say the above are ok with the established politics, no matter how horrible they are.

⬐ TeMPOraL

And people who say that want to guilt-trip the entire civilization into self-destructing.

"Used car salesman meets Jehovah's Witness" approach to talking about issues can work for larger injustices, but doesn't generalize well when everyone wants to air their personal grievances. Pushing a message onto every possible forum isn't going to help much, but is sure as hell going to grow divisions and just tire people out.

⬐ coldtea

>And people who say that want to guilt-trip the entire civilization into self-destructing

And people who say that haven't noticed that the "self-destructing" is going quite well by itself, and that some guilt-trip is actually needed to avoid it...

⬐ TeMPOraL

No, a lot of this guilt-tripping and politicizing is actually contributing to the self-destruction - it divides people more, makes them less likely to care about each other, and sucks out the oxygen in the media, so that the big problems cannot be discussed productively.

⬐ coldtea

The eras when "big problems [were] discussed productively" (and something was done about them) were the eras when the division was at its highest.

E.g. the division between the civil rights people and those that wanted a segregated society.

Or the division between the anti-war movement in the later sixties and the "patriotic" pro-Vietnam war establishment.

Else, the bipartisan consensus (or small differences) just leads to the incremental management of what's there, and no real initiative for change (e.g. like the last 3+ decades regarding the environment or inequality).

⬐ forgottenpass

>If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not.

It's this line of thinking that leads to people with minor platforms telling me to do things I already agree with, but in the most self-defeating and insultingly paternalistic ways possible that I wind up questioning my own positions because they advocated for them so goddamn poorly.

>Saying nothing even remotely political is better than completely screwing up

I think we don't understand just how badly the well-intentioned idiots are screwing it all up. See also: every Twitter fight between team We Know Best, and team Go Fuck Yourself.

⬐ throwawaylolx

>If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not.

Yes, and speaking only about things you have expertise on rather than talking about "values like democracy or human rights" is a very much responsbile way to treat and show respect to your audience

⬐ leftyted

> There is no feasible way to separate politics from everyday life, and leaving "politics to those who knows about it" isn't really viable. Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending. Because there is a message, even from quiet people. "Not politicising" is a political act and statement as well. There is no dodging politics.

People act like "everything is political" is such a stunning insight. I disagree. It's as stunning an insight as saying "everything affects everything else". Yeah, sure, everything does affect everything else. Everything affects everythign else in mysterious and unknowable ways but that isn't particularly interesting and it isn't clear how that fact should affect one's behavior.

> If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter whether those 1M instagram followers just like to see you do backflips on a bicycle. If have 1M followers you have influence. If you have 10M followers you are a political force. Even if you just ride bikes on instagram.

This makes my skin crawl. The presumption here is that a person can calculate how that person's beliefs and the expression of those beliefs (i.e. actions) will benefit/harm the world and act accordingly. Yeah, no. People think they can do that, but they're deluding themselves. In order to do that, you'd have to model the world. We can't even model a single person.

> Saying nothing even remotely political is better than completely screwing up ("Lex Notch"), but it's still the easy way out.

No, it's the hard way out, which is why most public figures babble endlessly about politics.

Hannah Arendt:

> The main characteristic of any event is that it has not been foreseen. We don’t know the future but everybody acts into the future. Nobody knows what he is doing because the future is being done, action is being done by a “we” and not an “I.” Only if I were the only one acting could I foretell the consequences of what I’m doing. What actually happens is entirely contingent, and contingency is indeed one of the biggest factors in all history.

⬐ BeetleB

>Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending.

Sorry, "should" is not in my vocabulary.[1]

>Because there is a message, even from quiet people.

A very useful lesson I learned at a young age. You are in control of your words and actions. You are not in control of how people interpret them, and shouldn't stress too much about it.

The other useful lesson: People will interpret a vacuum, unless they've trained themselves not to. They will find meaning when there was none.

>If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not.

Yes, but you are not responsible for things people are assuming from your silence.

I've been hearing this "celebrities have an obligation to speak up on things beyond their expertise" since I was a kid. In most cases, I believe the person saying it merely wants the celebrity to say something political that the person agrees with.

Along the lines of communication skills (the URL I link to below): Your message is devoid of almost any nuance, and is loaded with absolutes. I would recommend reading any good book on communications if you want people to take you seriously.

(And yes, I responded somewhat in kind. I could have taken it further, by pointing out that by taking your stance, you are contributing to the increased polarization in the world, and adding to the culture of no compromise deadlocks. If it is off-putting, you will have a window into how others see your comment.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19492234

⬐ rujuladanh

I hope you are trolling.

No, I am not going to give any credibility to random Instagram "influencers".

⬐ oraphalous

>There is no feasible way to separate politics from everyday life.

I got up early this morning to look at the fog that had rolled across the city. Politicise that.

> and leaving "politics to those who knows about it" isn't really viable.

Viability is relevant to desired outcomes. What outcome do you desire? Is that outcome a political reality? Given you believe everything is politics anyway - we can safely assume yes to that question. Of course - you're going to want YOUR political outcome and for these leaders to represent your political beliefs. So - really I find it hard to believe you really want anything other than an opportunistic desire to leverage platforms to achieve your desired political outcomes. And for you to achieve that - of course you have to first successfully politicise those platforms.

Some of us - on the other hand - believe that the fewer the vectors of political co-ercion there are - the better. And also - we'd like to get some engineering done among other things - which is harder when things are politically co-opted. Making everything political detracts from quality work generally.

edit: Just to add, I'm not arguing that people shouldn't be politically active. Just because I don't want to talk about how woke a particular pull request might be - doesn't mean I won't take to the streets to demonstrate against some injustice that I oppose.

⬐ qlk1123

> I got up early this morning to look at the fog that had rolled across the city. Politicise that.

If you have been in Seoul or Beijing, this sentence automatically politicises itself. Not fog but smoke though.

⬐ oraphalous

Lol - I wrote that expecting the flimsiest of retorts to roll in - knowing they would be good for a laugh.

I mean - it doesn't even achieve what it's aiming for. I haven't been in either of those two cities - so by your own logic, my statement isn't political.

And either way - it can't be true that my statement would politicise itself. Statements just represent states of the world. It is humans and their beliefs that politicise them. No statement can politicise itself.

BUT EVEN IF THEY COULD...lol - this just gets better... You just got done saying that my being in another city is what is somehow causally related to the politicisation.

Your response is so far from being an intelligible thought... you need to tear it all down and start again. Go slow... maybe test it out on a family member first. Workshop it.

⬐ qlk1123

> ... by your own logic, my statement isn't political.

No. NOT P does not necessarily imply NOT Q.

> it can't be true that my statement would politicise itself.

Environments matter. That's why I pointed out those two cities, where your statement can deliver totally different meaning and depth, and cause totally different consequences. Does that make any sense to you?

> Your response is so far from being an intelligible thought... you need to tear it all down and start again. Go slow... maybe test it out on a family member first. Workshop it.

Thanks for the feedback.

⬐ Angostura

> I got up early this morning to look at the fog that had rolled across the city. Politicise that.

What are you doing to ensure that in 10 or 20 years time other people will be able to do the same? Your ability to look at the fog rolling across the city is the result of a finely balanced set of climatic factors. If it's something you cherish, it is something you should think about preserving.

> Some of us - on the other hand - believe that the fewer the vectors of political co-ercion there are - the better.

But you're happy to do nothing, other than hope that technology will fix it.

... Clearly I'm exaggerating to make a point, and I know nothing about your political beliefs, but I hope you understand the point that I'm making.

⬐ oraphalous

Read my edit in my post above... you are completely missing the point.

⬐ Angostura

I'm not missing your point; I was responding to your challenge.

The point is that if you wish to continue the activity you enjoy, you may well need to be politically engaged.

⬐ Pimpus

> What are you doing to ensure that in 10 or 20 years time other people will be able to do the same? Your ability to look at the fog rolling across the city is the result of a finely balanced set of climatic factors. If it's something you cherish, it is something you should think about preserving.

This is an ideology. People don't think this way, most of us just enjoy the view.

⬐ Angostura

> This is an ideology.

Well, the first part is science. The desire to preserve it for others may be an ideology. It certainly requires political action.

⬐ coldtea

>I got up early this morning to look at the fog that had rolled across the city. Politicise that.

"Meanwhile, those in power went on their business as usual, and I was letting them, sending a signal that I'm ok with that, or at least that I wont stand in their way".

⬐ flukus

That is just absurd, not every hour of every day can be spent in resistance of things you don't like. I doubt you were actively resisting the powers that be while you were sleeping last night, does that mean you were sending them a signal that you're perfectly happy with the way things are?

⬐ coldtea

>That is just absurd, not every hour of every day can be spent in resistance of things you don't like.

No, but many hours can. If those aren't, appreciating nature (or gardening or whatever) instead, has political implications...

As someone quoted, "You might not care for politics, but politics cares for you".

⬐ AnimalMuppet

True, those who don't want to do politics will still have politics done to them. But...

> No, but many hours can. If those aren't, appreciating nature (or gardening or whatever) instead, has political implications...

Sure. But also, spending time on politics has gardening implications. What is your basis for deciding that politics should be the thing that wins? Further, what is your basis for saying that politics should be the thing that wins for my use of time? I'll be involved in politics when I think the issues are important enough, and not otherwise, you got a problem with that?

I don't want politics to dominate my life, my time, and my mind. I deny you the right to tell me that it should.

⬐ throwawaylolx

>While I wish such leader can speak for values like democracy or human rights, it is just not possible to happen.

And I'm very much happy not everyone uses their influence to turn every speech into a political opinion. If I read a Linus piece, I want to read about Linux, software engineering, git, kernels, operating systems, etc. If he started rambling about democracy and human rights, it would only introduce noise for me.

⬐ ekianjo

> While I wish such leader can speak for values like democracy or human rights, it is just not possible to happen.

If you are a sensible person, you also know it's not possible to have an opinion about everything out there. Every topic is a rabbit hole if you want to understand everything in and out. Most politicians only touch at the surface of things and never go in details. I can understand why someone like an engineer may be reluctant to talk about politics in that sense.

⬐ mortdeus

Engineers don't care to talk much about politics because typically in the development of tech, you only very rarely (if ever) encounter the kind of complex situation where you must resort to a political debate in order to differentiate between the better of two competing solutions that address the same underlying issue.

What I mean is that good ideas in tech tend to be somewhat of a logically sound and mathematical nature.

Which means it doesn't matter what you believe about your code, or what you had to go through to write it, or what it would mean to society if we just used your code regardless because you just so happen to belong to some historically oppressed minority group that is under represented in the tech industry as a whole.

If your code isn't demonstrated as being technologically superior after measured up against my code, guess what... your code goes in the trash, mine gets merged upstream, and everybody gets to come to the common consensus that as far as all the bits in our cosmos are concerned, every thing can be explained as being binary.

⬐ rujuladanh

Why would we care about Torvalds' political views at all?

Really, who cares? No, he is not a "leader" in any way outside kernel development.

Are we going to ask everyone now for their opinions on anything just because they are domain experts on something completely unrelated?

What is next? Asking (insert random famous politician) about kernel development?

⬐ reallydude

> It's a pity that a man with such influence has no message that he wants to spread

There's some people who think the cult of personality is a bad thing to promote and then there's people who wring their hands and cry about people who aren't using it. You can't win.

⬐ ToFab123

> It's a pity that a man with such influence has no message that he wants to spread

Maybe he just like playing with computers?

⬐ teekert

I did read about him being philosophical before but it could be that "radical Randists" twisted his words [0]

I read this after I just read Atlas Shrugged and wondered how my convictions fitted into the objectivists' world view. Whether this was the real Linus or not, I liked his view, as I generally do. And it matches his down-to-earth-ness. BTW: Please don't butcher my karma again for mentioning Ayn ;)

[0] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&ei=6IOkXO2a...

⬐ Cthulhu_

Probably smart; if he makes any political statement, ANY, he'll draw in a lot of drama, media coverage, angry mobs with pitchforks - shit he can't and shouldn't be arsed with.

⬐ coldtea

>While I wish such leader can speak for values like democracy or human rights, it is just not possible to happen.

Why would he have any great insight on "democracy or human rights" compared the average population? Because he wrote successful software?

⬐ qlk1123

> Why would he have any great insight on "democracy or human rights" compared the average population? Because he wrote successful software?

Linux project itself has been showing how people can collaborate so well. Obviously politics is also something that requires people to work with each other. It is hard to say if he, as a maintainer of this project, has insights of human collective behavior in general.

⬐ AnIdiotOnTheNet

> Linux project itself has been showing how people can collaborate so well.

Yeah, lets just ignore thousands of years of civilization doing that long before some Finnish guy made a software.

⬐ shawnz

I don't think the parent is suggesting that Linus is the only good example of a leader of a major collaborative initiative. Just that he happens to be one good example.

⬐ mikorym

Silly people want silly rolemodels? /s

⬐ bsaul

That is such a true remark. I’ve always been shocked by the unsufferable ego one needs to have to feel authorized to give public statements on complex global issues or life advices.

⬐ zeropnc

Yeah we live in an age where professional athletes, musicians and celebrities play an integral role in shaping global socioeconomic policy.

What the fuck could possibly go wrong

⬐ coldtea

Or worse, career politicians and career policy advisors. That is, people totally removed from any implication of their policies for others, and usually far removed (economically, socially, culturally) from the population they decide for.

I think the ancient Athenian democracy had it right: some law-making bodies should be filled by lottery -- akin to juries or the draft.

I highly recommend watching the TED Talk that Torvalds presented. You get a much clearer idea what he means by "not a people person".

https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

This talk is also back in 2016, and even then, he talks about not being proud of the way that he reacts to people sometimes. So, while his recent announcement may come as a surprise to some, it's something he appears to have been giving a good deal of thought for a while now.

I watched Linus's TED Talk where he's being interviewed (which is unusual in TED Talk format). [0] He seemed so nice and I thought he was so cool, like a hero in the CS world. I want to rationalize and defend him because his behavior in this email thread doesn't match my preexisting conception of him but I realize that would be a mistake. I don't think he needed to behave that way. I don't want to start an internet mob or turn this into a binary thing like "he's great!" or "he's awful!" are the only two possibilities. His accomplishments are really cool, but he doesn't have to be a dick.

[0] https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

Linus Torvalds | TED2016 The mind behind Linux. https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

I loved it when says 'i am not a people person'

Anything lynux https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

Torvaldes is not proud of his behavior, https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

⬐ jacquesm

Which to me makes it even less of an issue.

⬐ brudgers

For me, the video suggests Torvalde's communication style is less a matter of culture than individuality. That he is not proud of it seems missing from the caricaturizations of it used rhetorically.

> I’ve actually felt slightly uncomfortable at TED for the last two days, because there’s a lot of vision going on, right? And I am not a visionary. I do not have a five-year plan. I’m an engineer. And I think it’s really – I mean – I’m perfectly happy with all the people who are walking around and just staring at the clouds and looking at the stars and saying, “I want to go there.” But I’m looking at the ground, and I want to fix the pothole that’s right in front of me before I fall in. This is the kind of person I am. - Linus Torvalds @TED[1]

[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

⬐ Qwertious

Also:

>"WE DO NOT BREAK USERSPACE!"

In response to the notion that we need to break userspace in the name of progress/innovation.

Chris Anderson: So you spoke to me last week about these two guys. Who are they and how do you relate to them?

Linus Torvalds: Well, so this is kind of cliché in technology, the whole Tesla versus Edison, where Tesla is seen as the visionary scientist and crazy idea man. And people love Tesla. I mean, there are people who name their companies after him.

The other person there is Edison, who is actually often vilified for being kind of pedestrian and is — I mean, his most famous quote is, "Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration." And I'm in the Edison camp, even if people don't always like him. Because if you actually compare the two, Tesla has kind of this mind grab these days, but who actually changed the world? Edison may not have been a nice person, he did a lot of things — he was maybe not so intellectual, not so visionary. But I think I'm more of an Edison than a Tesla.

http://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_linu...

⬐ xvcnmdfs

Linus is right that it's about the work you put in, but he's wrong if he thinks Tesla didn't work hard to develop his visualization abilities

There's a myth that some people are born with amazing powers (Tesla, Einstein) but what people don't see is the hours they put in from a young age

Therefore, both Tesla and Edison worked hard, except Edison bragged about it

⬐ mtdewcmu

I'm pretty sure that the "work" Linus is referring to is work on the project, not work educating yourself and building up your abilities ahead of time.

⬐ NikolaeVarius

Of course he bragged about it. He actually wanted people to use his technology to fund other ventures. Whats the point of creating things if no one actually knows about it?

⬐ xvcnmdfs

You could say that if an invention is any good it speaks for itself, in which case you've saved yourself the effort of bragging and people still get to know about it

⬐ erikpukinskis

A good invention might speak for itself if you give it 20 years and wait. But you can't run a business if your marketing strategy involves "wait 20 years".

⬐ coupdejarnac

This has to be one of the biggest fallacies in tech.

⬐ aytekin

Good inventions usually look bad from outset. Otherwise someone else would have come up with them much earlier. So, you still need to sell your inventions and get people to see the potential.

⬐ aaron-lebo

Is it so hard to believe that some people just like to create for the sake of it?

⬐ jasonlotito

No, but who changes things.

Those who create? Or those who share their creations?

⬐ acqq

> but who actually changed the world?

All the production of electric power in the world and most of its distribution today is based on the Tesla's methods. Not accidentally: Edison's were simply ineffective.

(Some also claimed that the first ever AND electrical logical circuits, today minimized in every chip in every computer, were the ones that Tesla built as the part of his wireless remote controlled boat in 1898. Here the article: https://www.computer.org/csdl/mags/dt/2007/06/mdt2007060624-... just mentions http://www.tfcbooks.com/teslafaq/q&a_024.htm but I can't find other sources. So let's stay by the electric power today. Tesla.)

⬐ spurcell93

Edison and Tesla both changed the world. Tesla (and Ferraris) are responsible for the invention of first viable AC motor, without which we would rely on DC for our grid.

⬐ SixSigma

The Edison quote was during a live radio debate between the two of them.

Tesla's response was : if you thought a bit more, you wouldn't have to sweat so much

⬐ popee

Tesla worked for Edison and was a person who could finish things and some of them changed the world. He was also person with vision, so I think Linus is either wrong or he is trying to put emphasis only on hard work. What if you have person like Tesla with both qualities?

⬐ tylercubell

I agree -- you need a little bit of both qualities. The vision of what to create and the execution to carry it out. The two go hand in hand. I think Linus is putting the emphasis on hard work because we mere mortals aren't endowed with the same genius that Tesla had and for us, the best way to achieve something great is through hard work instead of "divine" inspiration.

⬐ nickpsecurity

The Chinese made a whole industry out of executing without visionaries. It's called cloning products of visionaries. Or slightly improving them based on marketing feedback.

⬐ pmontra

Everybody starts with copying. You need a certain amount of proficiency in a given subject to be able to innovate. China will get there at scale too.

⬐ nickpsecurity

They start with a bit of copying then follow with originality. This is true even for high schoolers doing programming in US. China's copiers in imdustry didnt for a long time. So, it's not as simple as you suggested. Shenzhen is in opposite situation where it's both cloning and innovating so fast there's no stability in offerings.

⬐ emodendroket

I think maybe you should go back to the history of the Industrial Revolution in the United States, which hinged initially on industrial espionage.

⬐ nickpsecurity

They didnt invent anything? Only duplicated others' work identically or with uglier, shoddier construction at lower prices? Im interested in a link with evidence of that if you have it.

⬐ jonathanyc

That's a false dichotomy, but also, this is a well-known phenomenon. It was taught even when I learned history in high school here in California.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-02-01/piracy-an...

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/12/06/we-were-pirates-too/

I think it's a really interesting phenomenon how quickly we as a culture are able to imagine that what we're experiencing right now is without precedent.

⬐ nickpsecurity

It's not a false dichotomy. It's what the Chinese did to American goods until they developed innovation centers. The other person said America was the same. I wanted references. Yours seem to illustrate that was true. Hilariously, too.

⬐ emodendroket

They brought in Englishmen who'd memorized the design of the textile mills so they could copy them in Massachusetts.

⬐ coldtea

Until quite late, with Edison and co, they didn't. And that's like 2 centuries after independence. All major inventions (and their first major uses in production) came from Europe until then, from the steam engine (UK) and the radio (Italy), to the car engine (Germany), the refrigerator (Germany, UK), the battery (Italy), telephone (Scotland), etc.

>Only duplicated others' work identically or with uglier, shoddier construction at lower prices?

Also, "uglier, shoddier construction at lower prices"? You seem to be under the impression that the Chinese just build cheap knockoffs.

Actually they also build also the high quality, high precision stuff you buy, from iPhones to BMWs (as of now 1 million BMWs have been assembled in Chinese plants).

⬐ nickpsecurity

"Also, "uglier, shoddier construction at lower prices"? You seem to be under the impression that the Chinese just build cheap knockoffs."

That's what they did in the past as I stated. They were renown for it. Later on, they started innovating a ton on top of that. The transformation was covered very well in the Wired Shenzhen documentary.

⬐ jcranmer

Many important railroad technologies were developed by the US, even very early on: the US invented the cowcatcher and leading trucks on locomotives, and built the first locomotive to be duplicated. The Janney (automatic) coupler and the Westinghouse air brakes are major railroad innovations developed by the US, albeit in the 1870s. Geared steam locomotives (i.e., the Shay locomotive) were also developed by the US for mountainous logging operations.

⬐ coldtea

>China's copiers in imdustry didnt for a long time.

What "long time"? China has been the "factory of the world" for mere 2 - 2.5 decades now and has done huge leaps since the early 90s when it started.

For contrast, it took from '45 to the mid-70s or so for Japanese companies to start innovating.

⬐ sfifs

have you actually spent sufficient time in China recently? I go there every quarter nowadays and find the innovation and impact of mobile tech on the everyday life of people a couple of years at least ahead of the West. I also see India beginning to leap ahead - kind of where China was 3-4 years ago.

Historically, it's only taken a decade or so for copying to move into innovation in Japan. China's already completed that decade now.

⬐ coldtea

>The Chinese made a whole industry out of executing without visionaries. It's called cloning products of visionaries.

That's how the US got its start too. In the 19th century still, most inventions were from Europe (England, France, Germany, etc), from the steam engine to the refridgerator, and from the radio to the internal combustion engine, cinema and photography. All European inventions.

⬐ rchaud

And the Japanese post-WW2. Toyota was considered to be the poor man's Ford until at least the 1970s. Samsung and LG were mocked as artless copiers of Sony/Panasonic/Pioneer products as recently as the 90s.

⬐ oska

> What if you have person like Tesla with both qualities?

Like Elon Musk for example (who Torvalds seems to be making a gentle dig at, in the quote above).

⬐ nsturis

Ironically, Musk likes Edison better too.

⬐ thameera

Source: http://insideevs.com/elon-musk-bigger-fan-edison-tesla/

⬐ roymurdock

He is simplifying the situation to make his point, that if you have to choose between inspiration and execution, he would choose execution by a wide margin. It's not meant to be an accurate historical commentary or to portray any sort of reality.

He made fun of euphemism and the way people mourn over or feel hurt because of choice of words.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuEQixrBKCc

This article asks us to avoid the d word (death, dead). This is bit too extreme for me. English is my third language and I have hurt people at multiple occasions because of poor choice of words. I wish it goes away, so that my life can be easier. It is not easy to live in society as an autistic person and I have no interest in learning manners of society when I believe I have more meaningful interests to pursue.

If you are a social person, you will not like my opinion and it's fine. I am used to that. Check what Linus has to say about it in his TEDx talk.

https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_lin...

⬐ endswapper

Thanks for the follow-up. That wasn't a challenge of any sort. I was curious because I enjoy Carlin, I didn't connect the dots, but I understand the train of thought now.

⬐ aq3cn

Sorry for cryptic and indirect. Next time, I will be more clear about what I want to say. I understand no one here is looking for putting pieces of puzzle together.

I think he syas something like that at 13:51 in this [1] TedEx talk. Really nice talk btw

[1]: http://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_linu...

⬐ weinzierl

Can't watch it right now but I like the quote from the teaser:

"I am not a visionary, I'm an engineer," Torvalds says. "I'm perfectly happy with all the people who are walking around and just staring at the clouds ... but I'm looking at the ground, and I want to fix the pothole that's right in front of me before I fall in."

⬐ kamyarg

Yeah, I also loved that part; During the talk he compares Edison to Tesla, and says: `Because if you actually compare the two, Tesla has kind of this mind grab these days, but who actually changed the world? Edison may not have been a nice person,[but] he did a lot of things`.

make sure to watch when you get the chance, he talks about his personality(both good and bad parts) and what made Linux/Git possible.

⬐ okket

Previous:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11622965

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11461113 (5 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11456863

http://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_linu...

⬐ kristoforlawson

I watched this earlier today - really insightful. I also love that his intention was to never make something great for the industry, just something great for him. That's where the best projects come from.

⬐ pier25

So why is Linux everywhere? Is it only because it's free?

⬐ pvorb

There are many more operating systems that are free (both free as in freedom and as in free of charge). None of them became as popular as Linux.

⬐ anbotero

It might have been that initially. These days it’s because a whole ecosystem was created around it, and yes, most of it it’s kind of free.

Think about it: if you wanted to work on something but you had to pay either for the software or documentation you need to base your work on, it’d be a blocker of sorts for a lot of people, specially if you’re just a student wanting to do a “simple” thing or wanting to test something. That’s just an example.

Having a 30-day trial of something helps, but it’ll probably not give you all the answers you need.

⬐ TerryADavis

#!/bin/bash

#This prints random words.

echo "$(shuf -n 32 /usr/share/dict/words --random-source=/dev/urandom | tr '\n' ' ')"

======================

The critical thing is that you do an offering of love, first. Be witty and charming. Tip: God's favorite thing on TV is soap operas.

You get back equal value like a fair barter.

God says... Dalmatians whittler farmland brokenhearted creature's outpatients paleontology duel nosedove Suzanne's adornments annihilation's crayons hippy pomade's whales testicles Hegel Georges vignetted gigolo ladybugs females stalagmite's settle Horus unwelcome sandmen Clara grandstands Neptune's sticks

⬐ server_bot

The linked list code example wasn't something I expected to see in a TED talk :)

Toward the end he mentioned Wikipedia and open academic journals - never really thought of those things as under the open source umbrella, so that was eye opening for me. A popular Wikipedia page probably touches more lives in a more meaningful, or at least more direct, way then any commit pushed to GitHub.

> And here lies the problem..

What problem? Google is something that helps billions of people every day in substantial ways.

No, it isn't revolutionary and exciting, but things that make the greatest impact rarely are. You either want to help people or you want to do flashy things that grab peoples' attention.

Linus had a great TED about this today.

http://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_linu...

BTW, Linus has done more for humanity than Musk ever will. Teslas run on Linux and I would be surprised if his rocket didn't use it in some way as well.

But yes, we all love Elon Musk.

⬐ bpchaps

Yeah... I should've been more clear. I mean to say that the poster I responded to is focused more on money rather than, "Holy shit, we landed a fucking rocket from the sky on a fucking barge in middle of the ocean. Fuck yeah!"

p&l is a silly goal when it comes to "Fuck yeah, progress!"

⬐ maratd

> p&l is a silly goal when it comes to "Fuck yeah, progress!"

Is it though? We don't throw money at people for building useless shit. If you make a lot of money, it's because you helped a lot of people.

⬐ bpchaps

You throw money at these sorts of companies to build knowledge and skill. You're investing in the future's economy and not the now's. It's selfish to think otherwise.

Why does making money have to be intrinsic to helping people? Ugh. Ugh, I say.

⬐ jaxomlotus

Not when you are an investor in Musk's projects (which I am). If investors don't see a return on "Fuck yeah, progress" type investments, they will stop making those investments and opportunities for progress to succeed will diminish.