Is there such a things as a linux professional (get paid to work on linux) when everything is free

I wane work on linux but i dont think anyone will pay me

Attached: 7fc.png (581x340, 274K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/hkDD03yeLnU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

dont rly know, but what about the red hat boys? they helped make fedora, pretty sure they have a couple of devs 24/7 working on linux, or at least had.

Attached: 1523869016545.jpg (125x125, 3K)

Like working at redhat or suse?

Sysadmin, Red Hat Certified Engineer

im a linux sysadmin. lots of jobs out there.

Working on developing Linux? Possible, thanks to donations to the Linux Foundation and stuff. Linus is full-time definitely, I think they probably have a bunch of others as well. However, you really need to get deep into the ranks to actually get "hired" by the Foundation.
There's also a bunch of corps contributing to Linux, so you could go work at Red Hat or Intel or even Microsoft. Of course getting hired there isn't the easiest and getting hired specifically to develop Linux might be very tricky in most of them (even Red Hat is primarily a support company rather than a kernel development company).

Working on developing ON Linux? Or being a Linux sysadmin? Not that hard at all. The sysadmin role as such is vanishing unfortunately, but Linux is widely used for development.

Yeah, RedHat, OpenSuse, Datacenters, Sysadmins, Security, Intel, AMD, etc., etc.
Just search online

what degree you took? certifications?

you mean only linux SE the future?

What's Linux SE

msc comp sci, used to work as sysadmin for different faculties because "oh, you know computers, right?"

work experience is everything, you don't really need to know anything beforehand because everyone from management to your coworkers are dumb shits.

Security Enhanced

Where root has no privileges.

you're saying i can't learn? What skills do I need?
Man this isn't fair,.

I literally never mentioned that anywhere. Yes it was developed by the NSA which is an external body employing full-time developers but NSA wasn't even one of the examples I gave of such bodies.

I'm saying you need hands on experience.

options:

1) moonlight as sysadmin, and list that as work experience. you'll figure everything out on your own with enough googling.

2) sysadmin your own system, list that as experience

3) go to sysadmin school, i imagine such thing must exist

4) start with first level support. sysadmin is like 2nd or 3rd level support. start from the bottom and work yourself up.

I dont know what any of those words mean user.
I hate this. I graduate in a year and have no technical expertise at all

I don't know who you are or who the other guy is, and your argument is TL;DR, but you probably aren't replying to who you think you're replying.

I'm . I take it you're not ?

There's plenty of jobs, just look around. Most are related to support, some are programming. The vast majority require more than "I managed to install Ubuntu on my laptop all on my own".

moonlighting = working illegally

sysadmin = server babysitter and logfile zipper

school = place where people go to learn sometimes

first level support = hello sir my name is john from connecticut how may I be of assistance

second level support = "supervisor" that hotfixes the problem somehow. can be a sysadmin.

bottom = the lowest plane of existance

option = a thing you can choose out of all the things you can choose from

experience = something you magically aquire sometimes from doing things multiple times for a long time.

nope

God im a FUCKING idiot man. How do I even be anything? i cant even program. programming is literally too hard for me.

sysadministration has almost nothing to do with programming nigger

99% of sysadmins probably don't know what template is. and why should they.

It's about copying and pasting console commands out of the company wiki. you know how to read a wiki? congrats, you're qualified.

I think high level data centre management / admin is done using Red Hat.

There's a number of cybersecurity firms that develop algorithms in a linux environment.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

OSX updates are free.

OP your pic is retarded the only OS which costs money is windows buddy

No, user, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation. Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ. One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Attached: 1505836375070.jpg (498x474, 49K)

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it. You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument. Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD? If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

Attached: 1500606749363.jpg (620x413, 72K)

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag. Thanks for listening.

Attached: 1523585801462.jpg (750x563, 42K)

DELED DIS

>There's a number of cybersecurity firms that develop algorithms in a linux environment

Debbie from HR detected... thems some buzzwords you obviously don't have a firm handle on.

Maybe you contributed to this script
youtu.be/hkDD03yeLnU

Attached: 1521807869069s.jpg (250x250, 5K)

im a RHEL sysadmin and make 63.5k a year so yes i guess?