this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
331 points (98.5% liked)

Linux

48640 readers
1256 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

They haven't particularly made a comment on the situation so much as acknowledged it's happening. They seem to be going with the story that they had nothing to do with it and this is news to them. Hope to hear more from them soon so we can find out more about the situation, how and why this happened, etc.

(The sceptical tone isn't because of disbelief of Collin, it's because we don't know enough about the situation to be able to say Collin is or isn't telling the truth here.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] eveninghere@beehaw.org -3 points 8 months ago (7 children)

Yes. I simply think I already wrote what I needed to. The answer to your question is there. I guess it takes time to see my point.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 8 months ago (6 children)

You only said 2 things:

  • we shouldn't rely on free software made by free labor, and we need to say goodbye to some 60-70% or more of the software we use
  • important software shouldn't reuse code already made, they should reinvent the wheel and in the process introduce unique vulnerabilities and spend orders of magnitude more time doing that

None of these make sense in my opinion

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

we shouldn’t rely on free software made by free labor, and we need to say goodbye to some 60-70% or more of the software we use

Again I'm just reading along, and as a person who cares about, you know, the principle of charity, I don't see how you can possibly think that's the most charitable interpretation of what they said. I took them to mean we should do what we can to ensure these projects have financial resources to continue, not that we should "say goodbye" to them.

And here's the crazy thing: I'm not even saying I agree. I just think it's possible to address a face value version of what they're talking about without taking unnecessary cheap shots.

[–] christian@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

But being charitable to the person you're responding to, they twice said explicitly that they didn't understand what was being said and asked for elaboration and both times got a reply that more or less suggested that they didn't understand because they're illiterate. At some point the reaction becomes understandable.

edit: different poster from the first two, but I think they were sympathizing with the other person

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

That's where the not that weird idea comes into play. It's not that weird to not want to be misrepresented - that's an entirely different thing from trolling, or strawmanning, or seeking out inflammatory topics on purpose. It's a natural and understandable reaction, and we shouldn't respond to it by deciding it's ok to retaliate with increasingly less fair characterizations of their statements.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)