Why is everyone bothered by the whole CoC business?

Why is everyone bothered by the whole CoC business?
When Stallman started working on Free Software he pretty much made it immune to this kind of political bullshit.

Linux will end up being filled with SJWs. Anyone with any skill worth a damn will leave the project and join an apolitical fork.
People will start using the fork because it is more active.
Linux will end up doing nothing but merging a handful of changes from the fork, and will probably be used by people who need it to be PC (think private enterprise).

It goes both ways too. I'd almost be considered an SJW. You bet your ass that if someone came up with an amazing AI but it was called something like py-hitler I'd work on a fork instead. Free Software removes the ability to hold a project hostage to any political ideology, whether you agree with it or not.

This is part of the reason you would want to use a license like the GPL for your projects as well. If a project is tainted like this, as long as you have the source you can make it work, and the GPL requires that you have that.

Attached: 0IvOl.jpg (709x980, 96K)

Other urls found in this thread:

lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I too don't get the issue. Is there a law or something stopping someone else from forking Linux and working on it?

Yes the law that any fork will deprived of the resources provided by Redhat, Intel, etc.

Ah, thanks. now I get what the problem is.

>Why is everyone bothered by the whole CoC business?

Because Jow Forums is as cringy as the sjw plague.

NetBSD anyone?

based stallman saving linux (which is a kernel) despite the bad blood with linus

It bothers me because any contributions to the Linux kernel now carry what is essentially a EULA: you agree to conduct yourself in a manner approved by a group of political extremists at all times, everywhere, for the rest of your life or face consequences. And while the supposed consequence is that you will no longer be allowed to contribute to the kernel, past experience shows that the people obsessed with CoCs will not stop there; they will shout from the rooftops that you are every kind of scum imaginable until you are completely ruined, unhirable and unable to care for yourself or your family. Given that no one could ever reasonably live up to the standards of these enforcers and the bizarrely overblown consequences of that, people who would otherwise make good contributions to the kernel will opt out in order to preserve their careers; as such the kernel will wither and die.

Political extremism like "don't use the N-word"

You know that's disingenuous, they're already going after Ts'o as a "rape apologist" less than a week later.

What specifically were these companies contributing? I don't follow linux dev too much (longtime BSD user), but I remember hearing about a Linus rant over some intel patch.

Maybe the project is better off without these corporate sponsors?

Political extremism like not being able to stand up for yourself when you receive unwanted contact from women, having different opinions, having an opinion that was okay one day, but became completely wrong the day after, not wanting to discuss extremely emotional topics with women that have nothing to do with work, prefering not to hang out with women, asking a woman to hang out, or otherwise not being able to control the "feelings" of someone else, who can up and decide one day that they "feel" certain things that simply are not true.

>Maybe the project is better off without these corporate sponsors?
Is BSD corporate sponsored?

I think they many it personally that the COC was adapted from contributor covenant, which is a very political COC, the author of which is known for trying to get contributors removed for political views.

Honestly, I have to admit I was a little sad to see it happen: I prefer a high-expectations hacker culture to a more hand-holdy one, and Ehmke's crusade against meritocracy antithetical to good software.

Linus rants were often unprofessional, but by the time a patch gets to linus, it should really have been vetted for quality. Kernel dev noobs should be working with subsystem maintainers or non-Linus mentors. The argument that Linus's temper and language was keeping people from contributing to the kernel is only partly true: it kept corporate devs from intel and elsewhere from committing shitty code.

Ultimately, I think the primary motivation is a political one: corporate contributors wanted Linus out and used his conduct as an excuse to do so. They probably see him as unpleasant to work with, a risk, and an impediment to getting their code shipped.

There are other good kernel devs besides Linus. Linus is probably better at developing new things than managing a big project anyway. I'm interested to see what he cooks up next now that he's not hindered by linux maintainance.

CODE MY CAKE BIGOTS

It seems overblown to me - The five that voted against it should simply leave and fork it. Voila. Have SJW Linux and Funcitonal Linux.

Occasionally yes, companies will donate to corresponding BSD foundations. They are smaller donations amounts, generally, and none are contributing code to my knowledge.

Right, but the Intel, Redhat etc will be denied a fuctional, working OS because the bull dykes and trannies aren't going to be able to generate anything.

It's wrong in both principle (both the idea of the CoC and the idea that you're applying it to the work of people who never consented to it in the first place) and it's wrong in practice, because of the who is implementing it and how it is implemented and also because any restrictions like these tend to fuck over development/progress.

Nah, there are plenty of good kernel devs that will keep their heads down and continue coding. There are so few bull dykes and trannies in the general population that there are likely none that are writing kernel code, and I wouldn't expect that to change, nor would I expect a COC to tilt them one way or the other as to whether they want to get involved in Linux.

Have you tried not being a misogynist?

>There are other good kernel devs besides Linus. Linus is probably better at developing new things than managing a big project anyway. I'm interested to see what he cooks up next now that he's not hindered by linux maintainance.
Maybe he is calling it quits after this?

I mean, yeah. Political extremism that violates your constitutional rights? Just as you posited. Here's the thing - I get this for anyone looking to be an employee of a corporation that has to face the public. If I ran a Widget distribution company, I would fire an employee who went around calling my customers niggers.

But this is a very different kind of scenario. It's a voluntary community working on an ostensibly free project that, again ostensibly, values quality of work as it's main metric. Once you start adding corpotacry limitations on it, it's going to lose a lot of what made it function successfully in the first place.

Except writing Kernel codes is now seconadary to appeasing bull dykes and trannies. Hence the butthurt over the CoC.

>nor would I expect a COC to tilt them one way or the other as to whether they want to get involved in Linux.
It's not up to them. It's up to those that wield the application of the COC.

Which is precisely why they are now trying to force out one of the key coding contributors to Linux.

>But this is a very different kind of scenario. It's a voluntary community working on an ostensibly free project that, again ostensibly, values quality of work as it's main metric. Once you start adding corpotacry limitations on it, it's going to lose a lot of what made it function successfully in the first place.
Why would anyone care if some opensauce devs went around and call eachother niggers for shitz and giggles. Nothing else matters as long as they produce top quality software.

They are contributing, what? Nearly 75 to 85 percent of *everything* that gets into the kernel nowadays?
I don't remember where I read that, so I may be wrong, but the truth is that Linux is no longer a individual contributor supported project. It's mostly corporate backed, or at least the Linux Foundation is.

That Linus calls it quit on linus is possible, but that he quits writing code overall? Seems unlikely.

>Why would anyone care if some opensauce devs went around and call eachother niggers for shitz and giggles. Nothing else matters as long as they produce top quality software.
Ask the 6 of 11 leads on Linux who voted for the CoC.

If I made py-hitler it would be on the condition you have to kill a nigger or jew to use it.

Attached: 1536488136327.png (1920x1080, 1.55M)

MY WIFE'S SON!!!!!!!

>less than 48 hours later
ftfy

its crazzzyyy...like what happened to the internet Open Source was like the last wild weste part of the internet that existed since its start. Now everything has ToS and CoC that can get you black listed.

What I mean is, transsexuals are already a very small fraction of the population. Kernel devs are another small fraction of the population. It is very possible that the intersection of the two sets is empty.

Suppose you were a transsexual that is interested in OS dev. Would lack of a COC keep you from being interested in such things? If you were not interested in OS dev, would a COC suddenly make you interested in it?

If someone isn't interested in OS dev, they certainly aren't going to get any good at it.

Or are you saying that the COC amounts to an affirmative action progam, where patches from transsexuals are accepted without review because protected subgroup? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't say that.

Im a coder in the third world. Im too busy trying not to starve to death, trying not to be killed by thugs and trying to build up enough heating to survive winter this year. Tell me why you westerners care so much for this feminism.

How come I keep seeing main stream news talk about this tranny dev and her fixes to linux what did she fix

>Tell me why you westerners care so much for this feminism.
Why don't you come over to my house (Sweden) and my wife will show you.

The CoC isn't about making people interested in the project. It's about controlling the political opinions of those already involved in the CoC.

I'm not sure about your second point. Perhaps. Perhaps not. It's certainly possible it will see poor code introduced (and see good code excluded). But the CoC is amore about ensuring those that already participate will comply behaviourly and intellectually with the political agendas of those implementing the CoC.

There is also the whole NSA/Intel thing, which I think has less to do with any conscious effort on the behalf of those involved and is just an obvious consequence of implementing these sorts of policies.

What's happening now is precisely the use case that people have regularly cited the benefits of GPL and open source for: political extremists co-opting the software. Obviously everyone expected The Government to be the culprit, but as it turns out it's pink-haired mentally ill freaks. Whatever. Any dev worth a damn moves to the fork, problem fixed.

>where patches from transsexuals are accepted without review because protected subgroup? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't say that.
You're naive and shortsighted if you do not believe it won't head that way immediately. Have you been fucking blind and deaf to the entire world for the past two decades?
>it won't get worse
>it does
>it won't get even worse
>it does
>trust us again on this new subject, it won't get worse this time

It may not happen at all, but if it does, if there's a single slip in society, I swear to god I will devote my effort and energy to hunting down and killing every single neuter retard who let this world fall into such steep shit, and the people who accepted it as status quo will fall on the rope next. Nobody at all save for mentally-stunted small children could be so immune to realizing human nature, it's strictly out of delusion or malice which people ignore it in adulthood.
>it's fine to let them kiss it's not like they'll start fucking later too, pretty sure they only said it was a kiss
Eat shit and die in a ditch you fucking goblin.

Attached: 1536722574660.jpg (588x870, 379K)

Yes, the kernel devs are screaming NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER KFC WATERMELONS in the mailing list all the time.

This is not about race.

You are either:
1) an ideologue not from here
2) an actual shill, yes I know this /x/ material but this went far too smooth, far too fast

Eh, I'm not an insider but they seem to employ a lot of the devs.

One of the key mentally ill pink haired freaks leading the implementation of the CoC works for Intel. The first major developer she is attempting to have removed from Linux refused to work Intel on a particular project because of security concerns. Turns out he was right - Intel was attempting to introduce an NSA backdoor.

Some former contributor with a grudge made a tweet. As far as I know there is zero action taking place against Tso.

I agree that purges would and could be a problem, and that COC is at the very least a symbolic blow against a culture that values code over identity issues. That's a problem in itself, but it doesn't mean they're coming for us all. It doesn't mean that some people wouldn't burn everything down because they're offended or emotional from taking the wrong hormones either, but they aren't and don't have the power to.

The OP is right: open source is resilient against this sort of thing and gives us an embarassment of riches where we can choose to use or work on software for ideological reasons as opposed to necessity.

Even if purged, good devs will regroup and continuing doing good work where the "post-meritocrats" don't have any voice.

>There is also the whole NSA/Intel thing, which I think has less to do with any conscious effort on the behalf of those involved and is just an obvious consequence of implementing these sorts of policies.
Three letter agencies and mega-corporations are just opportunists in this case?

God bless.

>WHY ARE YOU GUYS SO MAD AT PEOPLE INDRODUCING INEFFICENCIES TO THE WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR BULLSHIT POLITICAL REASONS!?!?
>WHY DO YOU NOT LIKE PEOPLE CREATING COC THAT ARE IN FACT USED AS WEAPONS TO CEMENT THE POWER OF A CLIQUE OF CORRUPT INCOMPETENTS?
>WHY DO YOU HATE IDENTITY POLITICS BEING FORCED DOWN YOUR THROAT?
>WHY DO YOU HATE BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO AND WHAT TO SAY AND HOW TO THINK?
>WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU I JUST DONT UNDERSTAND?!!?!?!?!?

Attached: 1537570886826.gif (652x562, 626K)

These people do it every single fucking time and then act fucking oblivious to it as if it were for decency and not their fucking garbage political shilling.

IF YOU BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE, ONCE THEY GET THEIR IDEOLOGY ROOTED IN ANY OFFICIAL CAPACITY INTO A NEUTRAL AND UNBIASED MATTER, WILL NOT CONTINUE TO PUSH FOR IT FURTHER IN THAT MATTER, YOU DON'T EXIST.
NOBODY IS THAT STUPID.
The only option left is being a lying facetious bastard who knows that if they were naked with their ideals and brazenly told people what their REAL argument is and their REAL points are and what they REALLY want the people would immediately fucking kill them. You know you have to build on it because it's lying, you don't have to build with truth because the truth is automatically constructed by its nature. You have to build with lies though, you have to build up your lies to justify other lies to mold the world to be more accepting of even bigger and sweater and greasier lies. They absolutely deserve an eternity of complete and utter pain and torture for what they're willing to do in order to shove their garbage twisted kike ideology into every facet of society.

Not a former contributor. A Diversity & Inclusion consultant who helped draw up the CoC.

It's whining because they're NOT doing anything about T'so despite his apparent breaking of the CoC.

Anyway, as you say: Fork.

I think it's just a coincidence tbqh.

wasn't Intel strong armed by Israel and taken over and all the HQ and factories were moved to Tel Aviv

>but this went far too smooth, far too fast
It was a coordinated effort, of course. During what? 2 weeks? We saw the master/slave BS from Stinner from Red hat, Linus leave, the Linux CoC, the Postgres CoC, and surely I'm missing some others, as I just tuned out for my own sanity.
It's not /x/ if there are so many "coincidences"
Just like it's not slippery slope fallacy if the slippery slope is actually real and currently happening.

why the fuck do any of you care about the internals of OS development when you can barely even program a fizzbuzz?

>the joo
Intel will hand out backdoors to your gubmint, no reason to go natsee about it.
I hate having CoC shoved im my face as much as the next guy, but Israel rejected spec from ISO standardization among others, so it's not all bad.

They're trying to oust Ts'o too and are harassing sponsors (like Google) to take more control/be more intrusive in the project too. It's a bit odd.

because you touch yourself at night.

Yeah, that's a reasonable concern.

My reading of the COC is that it limits the scope to development spaces and public spaces where representing the project.

This isn't any more strict than a standard workplace COC. You just have to behave in a professional manner when acting as a member of the company, which means not talking politics or personal stuff.

Any personal or private interactions outside of official functions are out of scope. So you can keep edgy neoreactionary blogs should be fine.

I definitely understand that risk. If it turns into a purge, or if people get in trouble for rejecting xir bluehair's shitty patch, or sharing "offensive" opinions on their blog, I'll be the first to say you were right, and you can say you told me so.

You very well could be right, but it's not there yet, so calm the fuck down.

Can Coraline fizzbuzz?

"Why do you care the surgeons at this hospital will now be policed for non-medical reasons?"

Why do you think you wearing a dress makes you a woman

Oh boy... Another fag lover.

>comparing the development of an irrelevant operating system to surgeons

>This isn't any more strict than a standard workplace COC
Precisely. Workplace COC's are incredibly stifling and restrictive. But you can argue they are necessary for economic purposes. But it seems entirely wrong/bizarre to introduce them to a "free" project.

>You just have to behave in a professional manner when acting as a member of the company, which means not talking politics or personal stuff.
It's NOT a company though - and by excluding those that are unprofessional or political extremists or otherwise problematic you run the risk of excluding quality contributions (since the contributions should be about the value they bring to the project).

>Any personal or private interactions outside of official functions are out of scope.
No they aren't.

No you won't, you'll continue to justify and equivocate because you are one of them.

so is there hope left

Linux runs on all kinds of things, including medical devices, spacecraft, heavy machinery, and all manner of things that are life and death for the users. Serious kernel bugs or vulnerabilities could cost lives or many millions of dollars.

Not saying this isn't anything but a lot of chatter from the peanut gallery, because it is, but Linux is hardly irrelevant.

underrated

A project being deprived of resources doesn't remove freedom. Red Hat and Intel don't need to serve anyone that they don't want to. But you can still use their code because it's free software.

LKML is hosted on a privately-owned server, they can exclude anyone they damn well want. Linus regularly calling people braindead retards and refusing to stop also runs the risk of excluding quality contributions.

>You very well could be right, but it's not there yet, so calm the fuck down.
Yeah, that's a good idea, wait until after shit's FUBAR'd before you get mad!

Attached: 1536810161908.gif (390x373, 2.54M)

>Calling people mean names runs the risk of exclusion
No it doesn't. You can't exclude people that don't exist (Trannies with good code).

Whatever, dude. I probably agree with you on a lot object-level issues, including a dislike for progressive dominance of cultural spaces.

I think I'm just more optimistic: the harsh reality imposed by computers means that talent supercedes identity in the end. Progressives can deny that at their peril.

You think I'm one of them because I choose "exit" over "voice" and am measured in my response. I am not interested in digging in and fighting them. If shit gets bad enough, talented people will just leave and start new projects without SJWs. They'll be rough around the edges at first, but they'll succeed because where coding ability matters and is not evenly distributed.

tranny janny just deleted my thread lol.
lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/

>trannies
Not sure what that is or why you think it's relevant

I'd only oppose to py-hitler's name because of it being unmarketable.

I know you're just baiting but this line of reasoning is indistinguishable from what these people actually believe.

Attached: 986525D9-373F-4DFB-9B18-5098A99D8175.gif (311x366, 133K)

lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/


read this article, the tranny sjws could pull the plug any time they want, but for now its a bluff.

So you agree the CoC is actually bad? Curious.

That article is bull, this is not how GPL works.
At most we get a spergfest lile cdrtools/cdrkit where "muh, copy right" is met with "lmao fuck off".

The problem with that thinking is that not only are major contributors being tossed out or compelled to leave by their own will (i.e. refusing to take part in the project or threatening to revoke their code) but the whole thing will do the opposite of what it was intended, it will scare away potential new contributors who don't want to risk their career being hijacked by nutjobs who found a five year old tweet.

The obvious answer is to fork but that entails a lot of wasted effort on branding, infrastructure, community, visibility etc. The argument is that instead of taking years to get a fork into the position of ubiquity that Linux currently enjoys, we could just not have this whole episode altogether and save everyone the blood, sweat and tears.

Keeping you safe from the side effects of broadcasting unsavory political opinions on twitter is not the responsibility of the Linux kernel maintainers. Anonymous contributions are always an option. FYI the person who was accusing Ts'o of being a rape apologist doesn't even like the code of conduct.

did you even read through all of it, they take out anything they want now. The article doesnt point out they threatened for shit but they can.

Getting mad won't help either direction before or after shit's FUBAR'd.

If I were a kernel dev, I'd be in wait-and-see mode right now. If all this does is clean up the mailing list, fine. If purges start happening, or if bad code starts rolling in and they don't shape up, then I jump ship.

Having a surface-level "don't be shithead to people in the mailing list or at conferences" just wouldn't be a big deal to me. More "activist" interpretations of the text could be.

I'd pay close attention to who's enforcing the rules and what their interpretations are.

>Keeping you safe from the side effects of broadcasting unsavory political opinions on twitter is not the responsibility of the Linux kernel maintainers.
Is it the job of Linux kernel maintainers to obsessively analyze a person's entire public persona and then publicly castigate them for any political opinions the maintainer feels are unsavory?

>FYI the person who was accusing Ts'o of being a rape apologist doesn't even like the code of conduct.
Does this mean they will not use the CoC to get their way regardless of whether they personally like the CoC or not?

Sorry, what major contributors are leaving besides Linus?

A fork would have initial branding hill to scale but probably not be so bad for users as long as ABI is compatible.

Honestly I'd prefer it if ex-linux devs made a new kernel, maybe not wholly from scratch but something that incorporates lessons learned from linux without the baggage of compatibility at the syscall/ioctl layers.

>>Any personal or private interactions outside of official functions are out of scope.
>No they aren't.

>Scope
>=====
>
>This Code of Conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces
>when an individual is representing the project or its community. Examples of
>representing a project or community include using an official project e-mail
>address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed
>representative at an online or offline event. Representation of a project may be
>further defined and clarified by project maintainers.


>Representation of a project may be further defined and clarified by project maintainers.
I get that this statement has potential fur abuse.

>and by excluding those that are unprofessional or political extremists or otherwise problematic you run the risk of excluding quality contributions (since the contributions should be about the value they bring to the project).
Just because someone's work is really good doesn't mean we should accept their bad behaviour.

You are misogynist by radical feminist standards

This. Fuck off buttfucker.

No it's their job to maintain the kernel. People with actual work to do don't have time to analyze a hate mob on twitter.

>Does this mean they will not use the CoC to get their way regardless of whether they personally like the CoC or not?
I really don't know, why don't you ask them.

>their views don't exactly align with mine so they must be the those of the other side

>No it's their job to maintain the kernel.
Then why do they need a CoC in the first place, given it has nothing to do with kernel maintenance and instead is used for witch hunting?

>People with actual work to do don't have time to analyze a hate mob on twitter.
That's why the CoC is put in place, to give the incompetents who do have time for this crap an avenue to raise a stink about it. Moreover, it's disingenuous to assert that only "hate mobs" have drawn the ire of the people advocating and abusing the CoC.

At least he can't get his shirt dirty.

>Witch hunting
>Incompetents who have time for this crap
People engaging in this are not doing Linux development and are thus not relevant to the code of conduct or this discussion. Just because you take the bait from reactionaries and drive-by trolling does not mean everyone else does.

pro CoC threads get to stay

con CoC get gassed within minutes

What would Terry think?

Attached: jyjy.gif (222x162, 1006K)

>linux fine for decades without CoC
>"uhhhh we need a CoC now for no reason whatsoever!"

the real retardation is how nobody told the tranny freak to just make xer own kernel. it's a complete tranny deep state takeover

>no reason
>didn't read linus email
not sure what you think this has to do with trannies

>People engaging in this are not doing Linux development and are thus not relevant to the code of conduct or this discussion.
Don't be absurd. At that point, what is relevant to the discussion? The question you should be asking is whether the CoC is necessary at all if no one will be using it. Furthermore, people who do not necessarily contribute code to the Linux kernel still have a vested interest in the preservation of the project because you do not need to contribute to Linux in order to benefit from using it; and if the project withers, users lose those benefits.

The document is an informal statement intended to instruct kernel developers on how to conduct themselves in regards to the project. If you care about the project and don't want to see it wither, then you should be respecting the rules that the project leaders have put in place. If you aren't part of the project and are just a user then this has about as much effect on you as the code-style guidelines. Which are actually much longer than the code of conduct and much more likely to get linus and gregkh telling you that you fucked up.

explain to me the very good reason that linux suddenly needs a coc

so it's completely worthless and pointless and the NSA trannies should fuck off

>reactionaries
Nice talking point. Of course people that don't like the CoC act in bad faith.

Have you looked at the mailing list? There's a message by a transwoman not being happy with the CoC (lol). Is she a reactionary?

I really don't know, is she a kernel developer or just someone trying to troll to get followers on twitter?

>the style guide
Let's see if it stays unchanged.
The example variable 'cntusr' might rub some types the wrong way. :)

Other way around: Redhat, Intel, etc. will be deprived of developers for Linux, at this rate. And while I can see some of the corporations selling out to suck up to the SJW clique, I doubt Red Hat can afford to, for instance.