Monday, September 24th 2018
Linux Community Hit by the Blight of Social Justice Warfare, A Great Purge is Coming
Through the 1990s, Microsoft had become a super-corporation threatening to monopolize all of computing. A band of talented developers got together with lawyers that could fish out loopholes in proprietary licenses, and with some generosity from big software, Linux grew from a scrappy Unix-like OS kernel to the preeminent operating system for enterprises at first, and handheld consumer electronics later. Today it's most popular operating system on the planet. Like every big organization, the Linux Foundation is hit by employee-activism.
Employee-activism is the new unionism. Whereas trade-unions of the old fought for tangible bread-and-butter issues affecting blue-collar folk of the early Industrial era, today's employee-activist is an intellectual predator seeking to maximize their organizational footprint on the backs of other people echoing their political ideas, often through blatant insubordination and disregard for the chain of command. Survival of the fittest has changed to "survival of the loudest." From forcing Linus Torvalds to apologize for speaking his mind in public, to coming up with a new Code of Conduct document, social-justice activism within the Linux Foundation threatens to devolve the culture of meritocracy to a toxic "safe space" prioritizing inclusion of identity rather than skill, as HardOCP comments. A major blow-back from the meritocrats is taking shape.
In a major revision to the license, software developers contributing to the Linux kernel source-code will soon be able to withdraw their contribution, if they are ever cornered by the rest of the community over perceived code-of-conduct violation (i.e. not pandering to identity politics or speaking their minds like Torvalds does). This is big, as many of the older generations of contributors who have made critical contributions without with Linux cannot function, now have a legal recourse, and could reduce the amount of political activism within the community.
Since 2015, identity politicians have been trying to force the Linux Foundation to join the Contributor Covenant, a special Code-of-Conduct agreement that seeks to change the "the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming." On September 16, the Foundation agreed to implement CC Code of Conduct. Shortly following that, groups of pro-CC developers went on a character-assassination spree of top Linux developers by amplifying and often distorting, their political views (which are irrelevant to the task of programming).
Sources:
Lulz, HardOCP
Employee-activism is the new unionism. Whereas trade-unions of the old fought for tangible bread-and-butter issues affecting blue-collar folk of the early Industrial era, today's employee-activist is an intellectual predator seeking to maximize their organizational footprint on the backs of other people echoing their political ideas, often through blatant insubordination and disregard for the chain of command. Survival of the fittest has changed to "survival of the loudest." From forcing Linus Torvalds to apologize for speaking his mind in public, to coming up with a new Code of Conduct document, social-justice activism within the Linux Foundation threatens to devolve the culture of meritocracy to a toxic "safe space" prioritizing inclusion of identity rather than skill, as HardOCP comments. A major blow-back from the meritocrats is taking shape.
In a major revision to the license, software developers contributing to the Linux kernel source-code will soon be able to withdraw their contribution, if they are ever cornered by the rest of the community over perceived code-of-conduct violation (i.e. not pandering to identity politics or speaking their minds like Torvalds does). This is big, as many of the older generations of contributors who have made critical contributions without with Linux cannot function, now have a legal recourse, and could reduce the amount of political activism within the community.
Since 2015, identity politicians have been trying to force the Linux Foundation to join the Contributor Covenant, a special Code-of-Conduct agreement that seeks to change the "the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming." On September 16, the Foundation agreed to implement CC Code of Conduct. Shortly following that, groups of pro-CC developers went on a character-assassination spree of top Linux developers by amplifying and often distorting, their political views (which are irrelevant to the task of programming).
653 Comments on Linux Community Hit by the Blight of Social Justice Warfare, A Great Purge is Coming
I think both sides are closer than we think. But then we have someone driving us apart. Just going to leave this here as a recent example of "fear the others":
But an SJW is someone who protested a plaque on a school with a quote from MLK.. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
It was deemed "problematic" because it was only about race.
www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/university-oregon-martin-luther-king-quote-inclusive/
Which is precisely why it's a horrid term. You might as well run around calling people "buttface."
What happened to stating what you actually think they did wrong, rather than lumping them all in a convenient, easily hate-able group vaguely associated with the left?
I mean it's brilliant really, because it caters well to stupid people and a lot of our country still falls into that category, sadly. ("stupid" being below average in standard grading metrics, no offense intended despite the wording).And see? Here I am, a bonified evergreener, telling you that's stupid. We aren't laden with people like that. But they make a lot of noise.
edit: I would also add that those Deconstructionists may very well have been a joke. There are some things that have come out in recent years that some of these philosophers and artists were being used by the CIA, to give the Soviet Union a bunch of bullshit to mull over and trick them into thinking the West had some "intellectual culture" superior to theirs. It was a LARP.
Only it infiltrated our own universities, and it's done more damage to the West now than it ever did the Soviets.
I'd also add that this is why Muslims suddenly have high social "value" than, say, white females now. Even though many Muslim circles go completely against the precepts of feminism (FGM, Honor killings, etc). They win the "victim" card more than the average feminists, because the "white patriarchy" (oppressor) hates them more. It's kind of the Black Hole/Singularity of Left Wing politics imo... where extreme Leftism and extreme Conservatism meet.
If you don't want tribalism, you simply focus on merit.
And thread derailed again. Unfortunately, I got nothing new to put it back on track. :P
EDIT: And your mother is a hamster.EDIT 2: I mean I call your mother a hamster.EDIT 3: I deeply apologize. Please don't pull all your comments from the forums because you have been offended! I didn't know about the CoC! OH THE YUMANITY!!
I don't know what to make of Democrats anymore... or who's using who at this point.
Then again, I could be wrong. Maybe there's more of them than I think. Look at the French Revolution. The whole country went mad.
PS: unrelated but as a testament to what democrats are capable of,
The ruling 'democrat' party revoked the students' amendment. It was repealed. The constitutional court decided 'those kinds of'(see the retaliatory speech?) oaths are against being a 'democracy'.
You cannot have good things in a democracy, they will be challenged and they will be abolished.
Not sure how to tie this back to Linux.
Monarchy: corporations would definitely seize control and it would become increasingly closed-source as corporate code is integrated (e.g. HEVC decoders that require third party licensing).
Democracy: what people want and what people need rarely align. Would lead to Linux becoming a bloated mess no one wants.
Anarch: Linux wouldn't even compile.
I think it's obvious which social structure best fits programming of all kind (meritocracy). The only thing that may come close is control determined by stake but who has the most stake in Linux's future? Corporations (especially Google), which translates to oligarchy. I would go with meritocracy before oligarchy.
In a way though, there is a lot of corporate push behind this. He works for Red Hat.. and it's pushed by Red Hat.