1. 3

    https://juliareda.eu/2018/09/ep-endorses-upload-filters/

    Hmm, I think this actually makes it mandatory for Wikipedia to install an upload filter.

    1. 13

      There is actually an exception for websites like Wikipedia in this version of the directive:

      “online content sharing service provider’ means a provider of an information society service one of the main purposes of which is to store and give access to the public to copyright protected works or other protected subject-matter uploaded by its users, which the service optimises. Services acting in a non-commercial purpose capacity such as online encyclopaedia, and providers of online services where the content is uploaded with the authorisation of all rightholders concerned, such as educational or scientific repositories, should not be considered online content sharing service providers within the meaning of this Directive. Providers of cloud services for individual use which do not provide direct access to the public, open source software developing platforms, and online market places whose main activity is online retail of physical goods, should not be considered online content sharing service providers within the meaning of this Directive;

      (Emphasis mine)

      1. 4

        Reda says Voss misrepresents the true scope of the upload filtering obligation and at no point does the definition exclude platforms that don’t make money off their users’ sharing of copyrighted content. She concedes that “completely non-commercial platforms” are excluded, but points out that experience has shown that even a call for donations or the use of an advertising banner can be considered commercial activity.

        (Emphasis mine, https://thenextweb.com/eu/2018/06/19/the-eus-disastrous-copyright-reform-explained/)

        Also, I am not sure that this is the exact wording that has passed. I am, to be honest, not well-versed in the EU legislative procedure.

        1. 2

          does an american organization have to care about exceptions in stupid european laws?

          1. 16

            does an american organization have to care about exceptions in stupid european laws?

            They only do if they have enough presence in a European country willing to enforce those laws that they could be hurt in court.

            If a company has no presence in any EU country, it can ignore those laws just like it ignores the laws against insulting the Thai king and laws against telling the truth about the Tienanmen Square Massacre.

            1. 3

              Untill some European countries order their ISP’s to block all traffic towards those companies.

              This has already happened with major torrent sites like ThePirateBay,org, which serves up this page to everyone in The Netherlands with this ISP (and they are quite activistic about providing everyone unrestricted access to the entire internet). Take note that other European countries have ordered similar filters and take-downs onto their ISP’s and those are being actively being enforced.

              1. 1

                Untill some European countries order their ISP’s to block all traffic towards those companies.

                Again, that only hurts the company in proportion to how much of their business was coming out of the EU to begin with.

                It also isn’t forcing them to abide by the law of any EU member state, any more than West Germany was forced to abide by East German law when the Berlin Wall was up and East Germans were barred from going to West Germany.

                1. 1

                  Again, that only hurts the company in proportion to how much of their business was coming out of the EU to begin with.

                  True, but since most major content-platforms in Europe are American companies, I doubt they’d get away with ignoring these laws. Nor do I think that they’d like to give up a market of about 510 Million people. Note that the United States is a market of only 325 Million people. So in terms of numbers, you have to care if you intend to grow beyond the United States, Canada and Mexico somewhere in the near future. You also have to keep in mind that Europe is a lot closer to the United states than you might think.

                  It also isn’t forcing them to abide by the law of any EU member state, any more than West Germany was forced to abide by East German law when the Berlin Wall was up and East Germans were barred from going to West Germany.

                  Actually, that isn’t true at all. West Germany still had West-Berlin and had to maintain supply lines to that part of Berlin through East-German (DDR) territory. Because of this, there were a bunch of DDR-laws they had to abide by, despite of being separate countries. A scenario like this, might also happen to US-companies as well.

            2. 6

              It’s going to be interesting for US firms that use e.g. the Dutch sandwich to avoid US taxes.

        1. 10

          The idea to map the heap inside the process address space multiple times instead of zeroing some pointer bits on every access is rather cool.

          1. 13

            Gmail casually puts all my email to spam, despite having SPF and DKIM and owning the IP address for almost 3 years now.

            There is no way to fix that. Whenever I try their tools, it seems that I’d need to become a bulk sender first.

            1. 3

              I noticed this years ago and wrote a post about it:

              https://penguindreams.org/blog/how-google-and-microsoft-made-email-unreliable/

              Both Google and Microsoft require you to send a lot of e-mail from one address for it to get white listed. It’s really quite bizarre. I even moved my e-mail server recently to OpenBSD on a Vultr node. They don’t allow SMTP by default and I had to request the block be removed from my account. So in theory I shouldn’t be on any SMTP-noisy subnets.

              Outbound e-mail still ends up in spam for some of my Microsoft accounts (but not all of them). I don’t get it. They really have imposed a huge barrier to reliable e-mail.

              1. 2

                I gave up trying to fight. Google doesn’t work in China, and their hosted crap was the same price as Microsoft’s but MS gives you full Office access, so I went with Office 365. They have a feature in which you can have them front a domain, but then send all the messages to a SMTP server. Just as you can relay mail through them as a smart host.

                Doing this I can still run my own email server, and kind of pretend to be self hosting, but at least people get my email now, as it’s been sent from MS instead of being sent by me. Of course this means that for so many people who try to self host their email it gets flagged as spam. It’s amazing how anti-competitive open things like email are.

                1. 1

                  Gmail casually puts a small amount of my emails in spam but lets the rest through. All my emails are pretty much the same plain text emails to people who have usually contacted me first but every now and then I have to send a follow up email to one that was marked as spam.

                  1. 1

                    Now that sounds rather weird.

                1. 2

                  Some of these are outrageous like inbox and nytimes but tbh most of these are fine. I can run a 40MB web page no problem. I regularly have to kill telegram because it has hit 5GB memory usage. My IDE uses about 2GB ram, firefox feels light in comparison.

                  Memory usage isn’t something most people care about at all. It’s the page speed which is more related to download sizes and cpu usage. A higher memory usage can often mean faster run times.

                  1. 5

                    You’re lucky to have multiple gigs of RAM. Most people don’t.

                    1. 1

                      Thats fine because your browser will store older tabs on disk storage if ram is low. I have 2gb ram on my phone and have no issue with websites other than news ones.

                      1. 2

                        I’m happy that you’re personally satisfied with website performance. Your satisfaction makes you an outlier.

                    2. 2

                      Riot also leaks, so after a few days it routinely hits ~4GiB.

                    1. 8

                      I love this kind of stuff because it seems young developers confuse the web for the internet. There is more than HTTP out there folks! For god sakes make your own protocols! It’s fun!

                      1. 6

                        I agree. Do you have any recommendation about how to learn to implement your own protocols?

                        1. 11
                          • Assume network drops or delays your packets indefinitely.
                          • Use CBOR for binary protocols and JSON (one message per line) for plaintext protocols as a very safe starting point.
                          • Anauthorized peers being able to grow other peers’ internal state opens up a possibility of cheap DoS attacks.
                          • Don’t roll your own crypto.
                          1. 7

                            I’ll add that learning about and practicing with FSM’s plus FSM’s of FSM’s is good preparation. Most protocols that I looked into were FSM’s.

                            1. 4

                              Haha, just edited my post to say finite state machines are your friend. :-P

                              1. 2

                                Yeah. People sometimes make the mistake of assuming the network to be reliable and fail to factor in the drops, fixing them on case by case basis, turning the code into a horrible spaghetti mess.

                                FSMs turn that into “what if I receive an init packet while waiting for a reply?” which leads to much more solid designs.

                            2. 3

                              Any time you need IPC within or across machines is a chance to implement a protocol. Generally, it’s not a good idea if you don’t know what you are doing, so I would first try on a hobby project. If you are getting paid for the work, do it when you have the chops to do it and the need.

                              This goes for everything if you are skilled at making it, make it, otherwise use the work of those that are. Clearly, there is a chicken and egg problem, where you need to acquire the skill, and that’s where hobby projects or practice projects are great.

                              EDIT: Pro Tip — Finite state machines are your friend.

                              1. 1

                                Do you have experience implementing protocols that are not your own? If not, start with that. You will learn a lot more about protocol design and implementation that way than by reading a textbook or blog posts or whatever.

                                1. 1

                                  I agree. I do have experience, but I want to know more about how other people learn and what they recommend since I might have missed something.

                            1. 7

                              This is a complicated issue for me, one that I haven’t really worked out to my satisfaction. I’ll give it a shot here.

                              My first reaction is send the developer a real monetary donation! Gold stars are for kindergarten, you can’t pay bills with stars.

                              But then I don’t think open source is motivated by contractually stipulated monetary reward. It’s more of an artistic expression, a pride in workmanship. Yes it does offer professional exposure, but I don’t think the best and most prolific contributors are fixated on that. They think to themselves, “I’m making this software well and no short-term business objective is going to get in my way. Everyone will see this and be pleased.”

                              Stars are thus saying, “You’ve made something beautiful and true.” It’s shared appreciation, online applause for a performance that has collectively elevated the audience and the performers.

                              However, to continue the concert analogy, great performances do typically sell tickets. This is where open source doesn’t hold up. It’s as if they audience asks, “Can we get in for free if we just clap really loud?”

                              I believe that existing web patronage models are a failure. Look at the average Patreon page – the scale of donations are like an alternate reality. Maintainers collecting like $100 per month total for stunning expertise that provides huge time savings for users worldwide. The fundamental problem with the Patreon model is that the developer has relinquished their leverage the moment they release code under an open license.

                              If I put myself in the shoes of the would-be patrons for a moment, I can totally see their side. Maintainers and bloggers begging for money are ubiquitous, and their requests are vague. After all, they kind of started their projects for nothing and apparently that was good enough for them, so their plea rings hollow.

                              I believe that the only effective model for being paid for open source maintenance is to stop work after a certain point and negotiate contracts with specific people or companies to work on specific features. The idea is that the initial work on a project (which brings it to popularity) is the investment that allows you both to create artistry and gain leverage for future consulting.

                              This is still a second-class arrangement compared to businesses based on selling products or rentals because it cannot scale beyond paid labor. The consulting rate may be high, but if you stop working on the project that’s the end of your pay from that project. By contrast, authors who sell physical books or training videos make the artifacts once and then enjoy revenue proportional to number of people buying those artifacts.

                              Would that I could truly internalize this capitalist mindset. There’s just something seductive about open source software – it feels like it’s the only thing that actually stays relevant in the long term. The commercial stuff gets warped and fades away. Freedom from commercial obligations and deadlines means that open source maintainers retain the independence to do things correctly.

                              Developers working together on OSS form an intellectual bond that spans nations, almost like the scientific community. It’s the software created (or the scientific truths discovered) that unite people and elevate them beyond their otherwise monotonous striving for money and physical comforts.

                              I’ll end this rant here. Perhaps I’ll never reconcile these two viewpoints, the material and spiritual you might call them.

                              1. 2

                                I rely on the Godot engine nowadays, but don’t really have money to spare. I’d love to contribute to their Patreon campaign, but there are specific features I’d need, and I don’t think they’re a priority. So it’s hard to direct money into specific problems. Bounty programs would be more specific.

                                Everything about this is hard, though. Having money stuck in a bounty escrow is not advancing anything. Contract negotiation and international billing has a lot of overhead, and may turn out to not advance anything. Not paying anything, money or code, doesn’t necessarily advance the project.

                                C’est la vie, I suppose.

                                1. 2

                                  The money really has to come from businesses. It’s so easy to say “Hey, this JetBrains IDE I need costs $200” and that will get approved right away because it has to be paid for and it makes me much faster as a dev but saying “This open source library we use is asking for donations” will not get approved because it doesn’t have to be paid for. The most I can do for OSS we use at work is send bugfixes upstream.

                                  1. 1

                                    IMHO this is a very useful observation. Maybe we should build a culture that tolerates little paid gimmicks on top of open source projects so that you can justify what’s effectively a donation.

                                    1. 1

                                      This seems to be the way many OSS projects run now. The core is open source which usually has everything individuals need and then extras are proprietary which are needed for large corporate projects. Its called “Open Core” for people who want to search it. Gitlab even has the source for the paid features public but the license doesn’t let you use it without paying.

                                      It does have some issues though. The major one being what happens when someone replicates your paid features. Gitlab says they will accept pull requests that recreate their paid features but they also have the resources to create 20 more by next month. As a solo dev, having someone recreate your paid features could cut out all of your revenue.

                                      1. 1

                                        I think this gimmicks can very effectively be access oriented. Custom slack channel, custom email address, custom phone number, access to a special meeting. Not so much a feature they get over others, but access to the team they get over others.

                                      2. 1

                                        It might also not be paid for because the value isn’t as obvious. A bounty-style deal might get approved, because you’re essentially paying for something you require.

                                        It’s a question of the direction of the funds and value. This is very obscure when asking for donations in general, don’t you think?

                                    2. 2

                                      A lot of great stuff in this comment I want to reply to!

                                      My first reaction is send the developer a real monetary donation! Gold stars are for kindergarten, you can’t pay bills with stars.

                                      I actually think you hit the nail on the head with your first out of the gate recommendation. I think no matter how small your project is you should put up a Patreon or a Bountysource or similar. Not just for yourself for paying bills – but for the people who want to feel involved but can’t do so directly. The patreon model is about supporting what you love. Regardless of the platform you use, you can display you patreon count.

                                      The fundamental problem with the Patreon model is that the developer has relinquished their leverage the moment they release code under an open license.

                                      I fundamentally disagree with this. It simply isn’t about leverage. It is about eyeballs and goodwill. Look at DTNS – the show is free to listen to for all – heck, it is even free to remix how you want as it is released under creative commons. It brings in $18,000+ monthly because it feels good to support it and the perks it offers feel relevant.

                                      I think it is about being savvy in regards to perks, and initial market. Developers were not the initial target for Patreon, there isn’t a lot of crossover there. That said, I think many projects could have very successful Patreon setups if they tried. Some of it is about tiers, if you want to get into the Slack channel it takes a an investment. The investment could be time and code or documentation, or that investment can be $5 a month. If you want to sit in on the monthly feature discussion roundtable – $40 a month or direct contributions at a level that you are invited, etc. If you want to get the project leads home phone number, be a sustaining supporter at $1000 a month for at least 6 month – etc.

                                      After all, they kind of started their projects for nothing and apparently that was good enough for them, so their plea rings hollow.

                                      Which is why you put up the Patreon feature early, so it doesn’t look like some bolt on or beg later. It is there from before anyone would consider contributing. Neovim had this as a bolt on after the initial funding push, and while I find their pitch possibly too gentle, at least it is there at the bottom.

                                      to stop work after a certain point and negotiate contracts

                                      This is devastating to good will, and will encourage forks so someone can take your work and be the more well known version of it with those +3 features. I do not think this is a good way forward.

                                      (and one last mostly irrelevant reply)

                                      But then I don’t think open source is motivated by contractually stipulated monetary reward. It’s more of an artistic expression, a pride in workmanship.

                                      I honestly think far more work is done in anger than for artistry. In market terms, more “painkillers” than “vitamins”, doubly so in open source. “The bleep won’t beep bleep bleep what type of bleep bleep wrote this. I will just fix it, bleep it!”

                                      1. 2

                                        But then I don’t think open source is motivated by contractually stipulated monetary reward.

                                        I guarantee that is sometimes the case. I’ve been turned down offering to pay for work on FOSS projects or public sites specifically because the developers and admins wanted to keep money and its psychological effects out of that part of their work. They were doing it for ideology, charity, fun, and so on. They had other work they did for money. They kept them separate.

                                        I still advise offering to pay the going rate for work just in case they need it. If they refuse, maybe a cup of coffee or lunch for thanks. If they refuse that, then a heartfelt thanks, star, and whatever since they’re some really devoted people. I won’t say selfless since some do it for not-so-nice reasons and the good ones get personal satisfaction from the good they do. Definitely dedicated or devoted to helping others with their work without asking for something in return, though. I respect and appreciate those people. I also respect the ones doing it for money since they might have been doing something without large benefit or benefiting companies like Oracle hurting us all.

                                        EDIT: Someone might wonder what I meant by not taking money for not-so-nice reasons. I’ll give a few examples. One is academics who release code as a proof of concept and/or with potential to benefit people if someone else works on it. They’re paid and promoted for output of papers, not maintainable FOSS. Many would refuse offers to extend older projects. Proprietary software vendors doing OSS side-projects and/or open core companies might refuse paid work on their FOSS because the features compete with their commercial offerings. Regulated industries using some FOSS or OSS components that had to be certified in expensive process would have to recertify them to use modified forms. They often don’t do bug/security fixes for this reason. They might turn down offers on specific libraries. Finally, some people might want the software to work a specific way for arbitrary reasons and/or straight-up hate some potential contributors for personal attributes. There’s a religiously-motivated project whose maintainer fits that description.

                                        So, there’s some examples of maintainers that would turn down money for reasons having nothing to do with selflessness.

                                        1. 1

                                          It is basically same as science. Which is also tragically broken due to funding (and valuation) issues.

                                          If only there were a global fund for free projects that would map their dependency tree, perform some health-checking and distribute donations in a predictable fashion…

                                          Then a government or a company relying on free software might donate with indications on what to support. Gov. might, for example, donate 1% of purchased software project price to it’s dependencies or require the supplier to do so… That would be about €5.000.000 a year just for Czechia.

                                          1. 1

                                            My first reaction is send the developer a real monetary donation! Gold stars are for kindergarten, you can’t pay bills with stars.

                                            I’m afraid that for most people, the hurdle to sending money over the internet is much higher than telling them they like what is done via a star (or analogous system)…

                                            1. 6

                                              Or maybe configure loading properly, including failing on unexpected loads early.

                                              1. 2

                                                Sounds like a good solution if you are looking to optimize your queries. Honestly, we aren’t.

                                                A simple example is a Rest Framework model API. We want to use this API for getting different data fields every time. There is no smartness in the ORM to decide whether to pre-fetch or not. Unless I take time to optimize each of the cases manually (or mindlessly always do JOINs which I don’t need), I can’t make it return me the data in an efficient way.

                                                1. 6

                                                  why aren’t you looking to optimize your queries?

                                                  1. 1

                                                    I will try to explain the above example in detail.

                                                    We write an API which simply returns data from our model directly.

                                                    Model Crop
                                                       name 
                                                    Model Farm
                                                       crop
                                                       area
                                                    

                                                    Now, we want to access a Farm using an API: /farm

                                                    But we made this API with partial support so that we can access only the data we need

                                                    /farm?fields=crop  # Needs to join with Crop table
                                                    /farm?fields=area  # Does not need to join with Crop table
                                                    

                                                    The above is a simple example, but things can get a lot more complex where we access 3 layers of relationships. In most of our cases, we are not seeing a lot of latency with caching added(see results in my tests, we went from 7s to 3s for a very very large query), so we aren’t worrying about optimizing it.

                                                    Of course, we should be splitting into multiple APIs which do different things, but given that this is allowing us to move faster, we have been doing it.

                                              1. 34

                                                Good talk.

                                                I recently used systemd “in anger” for the first time on a raspi device to orchestrate several scripts and services, and I was pleasantly surprised (but also not surprised, because the FUD crowd is becoming more and more fingerprintable to me). systemd gives me lifecycle, logging, error handling, and structure, declaratively. It turns out structure and constraints are really useful, this is also why go has fast dependency resolution.

                                                It violates unix philosohpy

                                                That accusation was also made against neovim. The people muttering this stuff are slashdot markov chains, they don’t have any idea what they’re talking about.

                                                1. 22

                                                  The declarative units are definitely a plus. No question.

                                                  I was anti-systemd when it started gaining popularity, because of the approach (basically kitchen-sinking a lot of *NIX stuff into a single project) and the way the project leader(s) respond to criticism.

                                                  I’ve used it since it was default in Debian, and the technical benefits are very measurable.

                                                  That doesnt mean the complaints against it are irrelevant though - it does break the Unix philosophy I think most people are referring to:

                                                  Make each program do one thing well. To do a new job, build afresh rather than complicate old programs by adding new “features”.

                                                  1. 30

                                                    If you believe composability (one program’s output is another program’s input) is an important part of The Unix Philosophy, then ls violates it all day long, always has, likely always will. ls also violates it by providing multiple ways to sort its output, when sort is right there, already doing that job. Arguably, ls formatting its output is a violation of Do One Thing, because awk and printf exist, all ready to turn neat columns into human-friendly text. My point is, The Unix Philosophy isn’t set in stone, and never has been.

                                                    1. 7

                                                      Didn’t ls predate the Unix Philosophy? There’s a lot of crufthistory in unix. dd is another example.

                                                      None of that invalidates the philosophy that arose through an extended design exploration and process.

                                                      1. 4

                                                        nobody said it’s set in stone; it’s a set of principles to be applied based on practicality. like any design principle, it can be applied beyond usefulness. some remarks:

                                                        • i don’t see where ls violates composability. the -l format was specifically designed to be easy to grep.
                                                        • the sorting options are an example of practicality. they don’t require a lot of code, and would be much more clumsy to implement as a script (specifically when you don’t output the fields you’re sorting on)
                                                        • about formatting, i assume you’re referring to columniation, which to my knowledge was not in any version of ls released by Bell Labs. checking whether stdout is a terminal is indeed an ugly violation.
                                                        1. 6

                                                          i don’t see where ls violates composability. the -l format was specifically designed to be easy to grep.

                                                          People have written web pages on why parsing the output of ls is a bad idea. Using ls -l doesn’t solve any of these problems.

                                                          As a matter of fact, the coreutils people have this to say about parsing the output of ls:

                                                          However ls is really a tool for direct consumption by a human, and in that case further processing is less useful. For futher processing, find(1) is more suited.

                                                          Moving on…

                                                          the sorting options are an example of practicality. they don’t require a lot of code, and would be much more clumsy to implement as a script (specifically when you don’t output the fields you’re sorting on)

                                                          This cuts closer to the point of what we’re saying, but here I also have to defend my half-baked design for a True Unix-y ls Program: It would always output all the data, one line per file, with filenames quoted and otherwise prepared such that they always stick to one column of one line, with things like tab characters replaced by \t and newline characters replaced by \n and so on. Therefore, the formatting and sorting programs always have all the information.

                                                          But, as I said, always piping the output of my ls into some other script would be clumsier; it would ultimately result in some “human-friendly ls” which has multiple possible pipelines prepared for you, selectable with command-line options, so the end result looks a lot like modern ls.

                                                          about formatting, i assume you’re referring to columniation, which to my knowledge was not in any version of ls released by Bell Labs. checking whether stdout is a terminal is indeed an ugly violation.

                                                          I agree that ls shouldn’t check for a tty, but I’m not entirely convinced no program should.

                                                          1. 4

                                                            just because some people discourage composing ls with other programs doesn’t mean it’s not the unix way. some people value the unix philosophy and some don’t, and it’s not surprising that those who write GNU software and maintain wikis for GNU software are in the latter camp.

                                                            your proposal for a decomposed ls sounds more unixy in some ways. but there are still practical reasons not to do it, such as performance and not cluttering the standard command lexicon with ls variants (plan 9 has ls and lc; maybe adding lt, lr, lu, etc. would be too many names just for listing files). it’s a subtle point in unix philosophy to know when departing from one principle is better for the overall simplicity of the system.

                                                      2. 25

                                                        With all due respect[1], did your own comment hit your fingerprint detector? Because it should. It’s extrapolating wildly from one personal anecdote[2], and insulting a broad category of people without showing any actual examples[3]. Calling people “markov chains” is fun in the instant you write it, but contributes to the general sludge of ad hominem dehumanization. All your upvoters should be ashamed.

                                                        [1] SystemD arouses strong passions, and I don’t want this thread to devolve. I’m pointing out that you’re starting it off on the wrong foot. But I’m done here and won’t be responding to any more name-calling.

                                                        [2] Because God knows, there’s tons of badly designed software out there that has given people great experiences in the short term. Design usually matters in the long term. Using something for the first time is unlikely to tell you anything beyond that somebody peephole-optimized the UX. UX is certainly important, rare and useful in its own right. But it’s a distinct activity.

                                                        [3] I’d particularly appreciate a link to NeoVim criticism for being anti-Unix. Were they similarly criticizing Vim?

                                                        1. 9

                                                          [3] I’d particularly appreciate a link to NeoVim criticism for being anti-Unix. Were they similarly criticizing Vim?

                                                          Yes, when VIM incorporated a terminal. Which is explicitly against its design goals. From the VIM 7.4 :help design-not

                                                          VIM IS... NOT                                           *design-not*
                                                          
                                                          - Vim is not a shell or an Operating System.  You will not be able to run a
                                                            shell inside Vim or use it to control a debugger.  This should work the
                                                            other way around: Use Vim as a component from a shell or in an IDE.
                                                            A satirical way to say this: "Unlike Emacs, Vim does not attempt to include
                                                            everything but the kitchen sink, but some people say that you can clean one
                                                            with it.  ;-)"
                                                          

                                                          Neo-VIM appears to acknowledge their departure from VIM’s initial design as their :help design-not has been trimmed and only reads:

                                                          NVIM IS... NOT                                          design-not
                                                          
                                                          Nvim is not an operating system; instead it should be composed with other
                                                          tools or hosted as a component. Marvim once said: "Unlike Emacs, Nvim does not
                                                          include the kitchen sink... but it's good for plumbing."
                                                          

                                                          Now as a primarily Emacs user I see nothing wrong with not following the UNIX philosophy, but at it is clear that NeoVIM has pushed away from that direction. And because that direction was an against their initial design it is reasonable for users that liked the initial design to criticism NeoVIM because moving further away from the UNIX philosophy.

                                                          Not that VIM hadn’t already become something more than ‘just edit text’, take quickfix for example. A better example of how an editor can solve the same problem by adhering to the Unix Philosophy of composition through text processing would be Acme. Check out Acme’s alternative to quickfix https://youtu.be/dP1xVpMPn8M?t=551

                                                          1. 0

                                                            akkartik, which part of my comment did you identify with? :) FWIW, I’m fond of you personally.

                                                            I’d particularly appreciate a link to NeoVim criticism for being anti-Unix

                                                            Every single Hacker News thread about Neovim.

                                                            Were they similarly criticizing Vim?

                                                            Not until I reply as such–and the response is hem-and-haw.

                                                            1. 9

                                                              To be fair I don’t think the hacker news hive mind is a good judge of anything besides what is currently flavour of the week.

                                                              Just yesterday I had a comment not just downvoted but flagged and hidden-by-default, because I suggested Electron is a worse option than a web app.

                                                              HN is basically twitter on Opposite Day: far too happy to remove any idea even vaguely outside what the group considers “acceptable”.

                                                              1. 4

                                                                Indeed, I appreciate your comments as well in general. I wasn’t personally insulted, FWIW. But this is precisely the sort of thing I’m talking about, the assumption that someone pushing back must have their identity wrapped up in the subject. Does our community a disservice.

                                                                1. 0

                                                                  OTOH, I spent way too much of my life taking the FUD seriously. The mantra-parroting drive-by comments that are common in much of the anti-systemd and anti-foo threads should be pushed back. Not given a thoughtful audience.

                                                                  1. 2

                                                                    Totally fair. Can you point at any examples?

                                                                    1. 3

                                                                      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7289935

                                                                      The old Unix ways are dying… … Vim is, in the spirit of Unix, a single purpose tool: it edits text.

                                                                      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10412860

                                                                      thinks that anything that is too old clearly has some damage and its no longer good technology, like the neovim crowd

                                                                      Also just search for “vim unix philosophy” you’ll invariably find tons of imaginary nonsense:

                                                                      https://hn.algolia.com/?query=vim%20unix%20philosophy&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment

                                                                      Please don’t make me search /r/vim :D

                                                                      1. 4

                                                                        thinks that anything that is too old clearly has some damage and its no longer good technology, like the neovim crowd

                                                                        That’s not saying that neovim is ‘anti-Unix philosophy’, it’s saying that neovim is an example of a general pattern of people rewriting and redesigning old things that work perfectly well on the basis that there must be something wrong with anything that’s old.

                                                                        Which is indeed a general pattern.

                                                                        1. 1

                                                                          That’s not saying that neovim is ‘anti-Unix philosophy’

                                                                          It’s an example of (unfounded) fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

                                                                          rewriting and redesigning old things that work perfectly well on the basis that there must be something wrong with anything that’s old.

                                                                          That’s a problem that exists, but attaching it to project X out of habit, without justification, is the pattern I’m complaining about. In Neovim’s case it’s completely unfounded and doesn’t even make sense.

                                                                          1. 1

                                                                            It’s not unfounded. It’s pretty obvious that many of the people advocating neovim are doing so precisely because they think ‘new’ and ‘modern’ are things that precisely measure the quality of software. They’re the same people that change which Javascript framework they’re using every 6 weeks. They’re not a stereotype, they’re actual human beings that actually hold these views.

                                                                            1. 2

                                                                              Partial rewrite is one of the fastest ways to hand off software maintainership, though. And vim needed broader maintainer / developer community.

                                                                              1. 0

                                                                                Vim’s maintainer/developer community is more than sufficient. It’s a highly extensible text editor. Virtually anything can be done with plugins. You don’t need core editor changes very often if at all, especially now that the async stuff is in there.

                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                  You don’t need core editor changes very often if at all, especially now that the async stuff is in there.

                                                                                  Which required pressure from NeoVim, if I understood the situation correctly. Vim is basically a one-man show.

                                                                        2. 2

                                                                          Thanks :) My attitude is to skip past crap drive-by comments as beneath notice (or linking). But I interpreted you to be saying FUD (about SystemD) that you ended up taking seriously? Any of those would be interesting to see if you happen to have them handy, but no worries if not.

                                                                          Glad to have you back in the pro-Neovim (which is not necessarily anti-Vim) camp!

                                                              2. 20

                                                                What is FUD is this sort of comment: the classic combination of comparing systemd to the worst possible alternative instead of the best actual alternative with basically claiming everyone that disagrees with you is a ‘slashdot markov chain’ or similar idiotic crap.

                                                                On the first point, there are lots of alternatives to sysvinit that aren’t systemd. Lots and lots and lots. Some of them are crap, some are great. systemd doesn’t have a right to be compared only to what it replaced, but also all the other things that could have replaced sysvinit.

                                                                On the second point, it’s just bloody rude. But it also shows you don’t really understand what people are saying. ‘I think [xyz] violates the unix philosophy’ is not meaningless. People aren’t saying it for fun. They’re saying it because they think it’s true, and that it’s a bad thing. If you don’t have a good argument for the Unix philosophy not matter, or you think systemd doesn’t actually violate it, please go ahead and explain that. But I’ve never actually seen either of those arguments. The response to ‘it violates the Unix philosophy’ is always just ‘shut up slashdotter’. Same kind of comment you get when you say anything that goes against the proggit/hn hivemind that has now decided amongst other things that: microsoft is amazing, google is horrible, MIT-style licenses are perfect, GPL-style licenses are the devil-incarnate, statically typed languages are perfect, dynamically typed languages are evil, wayland is wonderful, x11 is terrible, etc.

                                                                1. 8

                                                                  claiming everyone that disagrees with you is a ‘slashdot markov chain’ or similar idiotic crap

                                                                  My claim is about the thoughtless shoveling of groundless rumors. Also I don’t think my quip was idiotic.

                                                                  there are lots of alternatives to sysvinit that aren’t systemd

                                                                  That’s fine, I never disparaged alternatives. I said: systemd is good and I’m annoyed that the grumblers said it wasn’t.

                                                                  1. 2

                                                                    It’s not good though, for all the reasons that have been said. ‘Better than what you had before’ and ‘good’ aren’t the same thing.

                                                                    1. 1

                                                                      seriously. If you don’t like systemd, use something else and promote its benefits. Tired of all the talking down of systemd. It made my life so much easier.

                                                                      1. 1

                                                                        seriously. If you like systemd, use it and shut up about it. Tired of all the talking up of systemd as if it’s actually any better than its alternatives, when it is objectively worse, and is poorly managed by nasty people.

                                                                        1. 4

                                                                          Have you watched the video this thread is about? Because you really sound like the kind of dogmatist the presenter is talking about.

                                                                          If you like systemd, use it and shut up about it

                                                                          Also, isn’t this a double-standard, since when it comes to complaining about systemd, this attitude doesn’t seem that prevalent.

                                                                          1. 2

                                                                            No, because no other tool threatens the ecosystem like systemd does.

                                                                            Analogy: it wasn’t a double-standard 10 years ago to complain about Windows and say ‘if you like Windows, use it and shut up about it’.

                                                                            1. 3

                                                                              I see this kind of vague criticism when it comes to systemd alot. What ecosystem is it really breaking? It’s all still open source, there aren’t any proprietary protocols or corporate patents that prevent people from modifying the software to not have to rely on systemd. This “threat”, thr way I see it, has turned out to be at most a “ minor inconvenience “.

                                                                              I suppose you’re thinking about examples like GNOME, but on the one hand, GNOME isn’t a unix-dogmatist project, but instead they aim to create a integrated desktop experience, consciously trading this in for ideal modularity – and on the other, projects like OpenBSD have managed to strip out what required systemd and have a working desktop environment. Most other examples, of which I know, have a similar pattern.

                                                                2. 6

                                                                  I think that the problem is fanboyism, echo chambers and ideologies.

                                                                  I might be wrong, so please don’t consider this an accusation. But you writing this sounds like someone hearing that systemd is bad, therefore never looking at it, yet copying it. Then one tries it and finding out that baseless prejudices were in fact baseless.

                                                                  After that the assumption is that everyone else must have been doing the same and one is enlightened now to see it’s actually really cool.

                                                                  I think that this group behavior and blindly copying opinions is one of the worst things in IT these days, even though of course it’s not limited to this field.

                                                                  A lot of people criticizing systemd actually looked at systemd, really deep, maybe even built stuff on it, or at least worked with it in production as sysadmin/devop/sre/…

                                                                  Yes, I have used systemd, yes I understand why decisions we’re taken, where authors if the software were going, read specs of the various parts (journald for example), etc.

                                                                  I think I have a pretty good understanding compared to at least most people that only saw it from a users perspective (considering writing unit files to be users perspective as well).

                                                                  So I could write about that in my CV and be happy that I can answer a lot of questions regarding systemd, advocate its usage to create more demand and be happy.

                                                                  To sum it up: I still consider systemd to be bad on multiple layers, both implementation and some ideas that I considered great but then through using it seeing that it was a wrong assumption. By the way that’s the thing I would not blame anyone for. It’s good that stuff gets tried, that’s how research works. It’s not the first and not the last project that will come out sounding good, to only find out a lot of things either doesn’t make a difference or make it worse.

                                                                  I am a critic of systemd but I agree that there’s a lot of FUD as well. Especially when there’s people that blame everything, including own incompetence on systemd. Nobody should ever expect a new project to be a magic bullet. That’s just dumb and I would never blame systemd for trying a different approach or for not being perfect. However I think it has problems on many levels. While I think the implementation isn’t really good that’s something that can be fixed. However I think some parts of the concept level are either pretty bad or have turned out to be bad decisions.

                                                                  I was very aware that especially in the beginning the implementation was bad. A lot got better. That’s to be expected. However next to various design decisions I consider bad I think many more were based on ideas that I think to most people in IT sound good and reasonable but in the specific scenarios that systemd is used it at least in my experience do not work out at all or only work well in very basic cases.

                                                                  In other words the cases where other solutions are working maybe not optimal, but that aren’t considered a problem worth fixing because the added complexity isn’t worth it systemd really shines. However when something is more complex I think using systemd frequently turns out to be an even worse solution.

                                                                  While I don’t wanna go into detail because I don’t think this is the right format for an actual analysis I think systemd in this field a lot in common with both configuration management and JavaScript frameworks. They tend to be amazing for use cases that are simple (todo applications for example), but together with various other complexities often make stuff unnecessarily complicated.

                                                                  And just like with JavaScript frameworks and configuration management there’s a lot of FUD, ideologies, echochambers, following the opinion of some thought leaders, and very little building your own solid opinion.

                                                                  Long story short. If you criticize something without knowing what it is about then yes that’s dumb and likely FUD. However assuming that’s the only possible reason for someone criticizing software is similarly dumb and often FUD regarding this opinion.

                                                                  This by the way also works the reverse. I frequently see people liking software and echoing favorable statements for the same reasons. Not understanding what they say, just copying sentences of opinion leaders, etc.

                                                                  It’s the same pattern, just the reversal, positive instead of negative.

                                                                  The problem isn’t someone disliking or liking something, but that opinions and thoughts are repeated without understanding which makes it hard to have discussions and arguments that give both sides any valuable insides or learnings

                                                                  Then things also get personal. People hate on Poetteing and think he is dumb and Poetteing thinks every critic is dumb. Just because that’s a lot of what you see when every statement is blindly echoed.

                                                                  1. 1

                                                                    That’s nice, but the implication of the anti-systemd chorus was that sys v init was good enough. Not all of these other “reasonable objections” that people are breathless to mention.

                                                                    The timbre reminded me of people who say autotools is preferrable to cmake. People making a lot of noise about irrelevant details and ignoring the net gain.

                                                                    But you writing this sounds like someone hearing that systemd is bad, therefore never looking at it, yet copying it.

                                                                    No, I’m reacting to the idea that the systemd controversy took up any space in my mind at all. It’s good software. It doesn’t matter if X or Y is technically better, the popular narrative was that systemd is a negative thing, a net-loss.

                                                                    1. 2

                                                                      In your opinion it’s good software and you summed up the “anti-systemd camp” with “sys v init was good enough” even though people from said “anti-systemd camp” on this very thread disagreed that that was their point.

                                                                      To give you an entirely different point of view, I’m surprised you don’t want to know anything about a key piece of a flagship server operating systems (taking that one distro is technically an OS) affecting the entire eco system and unrelated OS’ (BSDs etc.) that majorly affects administration and development on Linux-based systems. Especially when people have said there are clear technical reasons for disliking the major change and forced compliance with “the new way”.

                                                                      1. 2

                                                                        you summed up the “anti-systemd camp” with “sys v init was good enough” even though people from said “anti-systemd camp” on this very thread disagreed that that was their point.

                                                                        Even in this very thread no one has actually named a preferred alternative. I suspect they don’t want to be dragged into a discussion of details :)

                                                                        affecting the entire eco system and unrelated OS’ (BSDs etc.)

                                                                        BSDs would be a great forum for demonstrating the alternatives to systemd.

                                                                        1. 2

                                                                          Well, considering how many features that suite of software has picked up, there isn’t currently one so that shortens the conversation :)

                                                                          launchd is sort of a UNIX alternative too, but it’s currently running only on MacOS and it recently went closed source.

                                                                  2. 3

                                                                    It violates unix philosohpy

                                                                    That accusation was also made against neovim. The people muttering this stuff are slashdot markov chains, they don’t have any idea what they’re talking about.

                                                                    i don’t follow your reasoning. why is it relevant that people also think neovim violates the unix philosophy? are you saying that neovim conforms to the unix philosophy, and therefore people who say it doesn’t must not know what they’re talking about?

                                                                    1. 1

                                                                      are you saying that neovim conforms to the unix philosophy, and therefore people who say it doesn’t must not know what they’re talking about?

                                                                      When the implication is that Vim better aligns with the unix philosophy, yes, anyone who avers that doesn’t know what they’re talking about. “Unix philosophy” was never a goal of Vim (”:help design-not” was strongly worded to that effect until last year, but it was never true anyways) and shows a deep lack of familiarity with Vim’s features.

                                                                      Some people likewise speak of a mythical “Vim way” which again means basically nothing. But that’s a different topic.

                                                                      1. 1

                                                                        vim does have fewer features which can be handled by other tools though right? not that vim is particularly unixy, but we’re talking degrees

                                                                    2. 1

                                                                      The people muttering this stuff are slashdot markov chains, they don’t have any idea what they’re talking about

                                                                      I’ll bookmark this comment just for this description.

                                                                    1. 3

                                                                      The following will allow you to configure the SQL Server license…

                                                                      Stopped reading right there. I really look forward to the time when our grandchildren will ask why were we complicating our lives by artificially crippling the software we wrote on top of forbidding others to improve it.

                                                                      We’ll sit down with them and start the long story starting with The Hunchback of Notre-Dame…

                                                                      1. 7

                                                                        Cory always scares me.

                                                                        1. 21

                                                                          This was from 2012. Arguably, we’re already there. Tons of popular computers run signed bootloaders and won’t run arbitrary code. Popular OS vendors already pluck apps from their walled garden on the whims of freedom-optional sovereignties.

                                                                          The civil war came and went and barely anyone took up arms. :(

                                                                          1. 5

                                                                            It’s not like there won’t always be some subset of developer- and hacker-friendly computers available to us. Sure, iPhones are locked down but there are plenty of cheap Android phones which can be rooted, flashed with new firmware, etc. Same for laptops, there are still plenty to choose from where the TPM can be disabled or controlled.

                                                                            Further, open ARM dev boards are getting both very powerful and very cheap. Ironically, it might even be appropriate to thank China and its dirt-cheap manufacturing industry for this freedom since without it, relatively small runs of these tiny complicated computers wouldn’t even be possible.

                                                                            1. 9

                                                                              This is actually the danger. There will always be a need for machines for developers to use, but the risk is that these machines and the machines for everyone else (who the market seems to think don’t “need” actual control over their computers) will diverge increasingly. “Developer” machines will become more expensive, rarer, harder to find, and not something people who aren’t professional developers (e.g. kids) own.

                                                                              We’re already seeing this happen to some extent. There are a large number of people who previously owned PCs but who now own only locked down smartphones and tablets (moreover, even if these devices aren’t locked down, they’re fundamentally oriented towards consumption, as I touched on here).

                                                                              Losing the GPC war doesn’t mean non-locked-down machines disappearing; it simply means the percentage of people owning them will decline to a tiny percentage, and thus social irrelevance. The challenge is winning the GPC war for the general public, not just for developers. Apathy makes it feel like we’ve already lost.

                                                                              1. 0

                                                                                Arguably iPhones are dev friendly in a limited way. if you’re willing to use Xcode, you can develop for your iPhone all you want at no charge.

                                                                                1. 7

                                                                                  Develop for, yes, within the bounds of what Apple deems permissible. But you can’t replace iOS and port Linux or Android to it because the hardware is very locked down. (Yes, you might be able to jailbreak the phone through some bug, until Apple patches it, anyway.)

                                                                                  Mind you, I’m not bemoaning the fact or chastising Apple or anything. They can do what they want. My original point was just that for every locked-down device that’s really a general-purpose computer inside, there are open alternatives and likely will be as long as there is a market for them and a way to cheaply manufacture them.

                                                                                  1. 4

                                                                                    Absolutely! Even more impressive is that with Android, Google has made such a (mostly) open architecture into a mass market success.

                                                                                    However it’s interesting to note that on that very architecture, if you buy an average Android phone, it’s locked down with vendorware such that in order to install what you want you’ll likely have to wipe the entire ecosystem off the phone and substitute an OSS distribution.

                                                                                    I get that the point here is that you CAN, but again, most users don’t want the wild wild west. Because, fundamentally, they don’t care. They want devices (and computers) that work.

                                                                                    1. 6

                                                                                      Google has made such a (mostly) open architecture into a mass market success.

                                                                                      Uh, I used to say that until I looked at the history and the present. I think it’s more accurate that they made a proprietary platform on an open core a huge success by tying it into their existing, huge market. They’ve been making it more proprietary over time, too. So, maybe that’s giving them too much credit. I’ll still credit them with their strategy doing more good for open-source or user-controlled phones than their major competitors. I think it’s just a side effect of GPL and them being too cheap to rewrite core at this point, though.

                                                                                    2. 2

                                                                                      I like to think that companies providing OSes are a bit like states. They have to find a boundary over how much liberty over safety they should set, and that’s not an easy task.

                                                                                    3. 3

                                                                                      This is not completely true. There are some features you can’t use without an Apple developer account which costs $100/yr. One of those features is NetworkExtension.

                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                        friendly in a limited way.

                                                                                        OK, so you can take issue with “all you want” but I clearly state at the outset that free development options are limited.

                                                                                2. 6

                                                                                  Over half a million people or 2 out of 100 Americans died in the Civil War. There was little innocent folks in general public could do to prevent it or minimize losses Personally, I found his “civil war” to be less scary. The public can stamp these problems out if they merely care.

                                                                                  That they consistently are apathetic is what scares me.

                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                    Agreed 100%.

                                                                                    I have no idea what to do. The best solution I think is education. I’m a software engineer. Not the best one ever, but I try my best. I try to be a good computing citizen, using free software whenever possible. Only once did I meet a coworker who shared my values about free software and not putting so much trust in our computing devices - the other 99% of the time, my fellow devs think I’m crazy for giving a damn.

                                                                                    Let alone what people without technical backgrounds give a damn about this stuff. If citizens cared and demanded freedom in their software, that would position society much better to handle “software eating the world”.

                                                                                    1. 6

                                                                                      The freedoms guaranteed by free software were always deeply abstruse and inaccessible for laypeople.

                                                                                      Your GNOME desktop can be 100% GPL and it will still be nearly impossible for you to even try to change anything about it; even locating the source code for any given feature is hard.

                                                                                      That’s not to say free software isn’t important or beneficial—it’s a crucial and historical movement. But it’s sad that it takes so much expertise to alter and recompile a typical program.

                                                                                      GNU started with an ambition to have a user desktop system that’s extensible and hackable via Lisp or Scheme. That didn’t really happen, outside of Emacs.

                                                                                      1. 6

                                                                                        Your GNOME desktop can be 100% GPL and it will still be nearly impossible for you to even try to change anything about it; even locating the source code for any given feature is hard.

                                                                                        I tried to see how true that is with a random feature. I picked brightness setting in the system status area. Finding the source for this was not so hard, it took me a few minutes (turns out it is JavaScript). Of course it would have been better if there was something similar to browser developer tools somewhere.

                                                                                        Modifying it would probably be harder since I can’t find a file called brightness.js on my machine. I suppose they pack the JavaScript code somehow…

                                                                                        About 10 years ago (before it switched to ELF) I used Minix3 as my main OS for about a year. It was very hackable. We did something called “tracking current” (which apparently is still possible): the source code for the whole OS was on the disk and it was easy to modify and recompile everything. I wish more systems worked like this.

                                                                                        1. 6

                                                                                          Remember when the One Laptop Per Child device was going to have a “view source” button on every activity?

                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                            Oh yes, that would have been so nice…

                                                                                  2. 3

                                                                                    Cory always brings so much more work that needs to be done to the table.

                                                                                  1. 18

                                                                                    IANAL, but Massachusetts (where I live) has a Right To Repair law in place, under which manufacturers (e.g., Bosch) are legally required to make official repair manuals, materials, etc. available to consumers for a reasonable cost. If Bosch sells their e-bikes in Mass, chances are they’re on the hook for this.

                                                                                    EDIT: Never mind, motorized bicycles do not count as motor vehicles in MA. The Right to Repair Act does not apply here.

                                                                                    1. 8

                                                                                      I’d like to see a right to repair law applied to almost everything. It’s horrifying how many devices get thrown away because they had a faulty switch or old battery.

                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                        I would like to see that in EU as well…

                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                          I thought the right to repair is already well established in the EU.

                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                            Is it? It didn’t notice it being voted on yet.

                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                              I could be wrong, but I remember back when there was issue with farmers in America not being able to repair their equipment that they were getting hold of firmware updates from Europe so that they could do so - something about the European ones not having code that banned third party repair.

                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                        Is there any room for innovation in sound-reduction here? I’ve always imagine something like double-glazed glass panels rising up from the backs of desks, maybe all the way to the roof. With a good vacuum between the glass I thought maybe you’d cut down on some noise, especially if the sound travels through multiple of these screens. Certainly the windows in my house cut down the outside noise a bit. And you’d still let light through, which would make them less grim than gray panels.

                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                          Good acoustic design is a must in an open floor plan. If the room echoes, conversation volume gets amplified. Decorative acoustic foam is inexpensive and can be hung on the walls and ceiling to reduce echo. Dividers can be used in a large room to give separation to conversations and absorb some sound.

                                                                                          Glass is not what you want, because it will echo; if you have cubicle-shaped glass dividers, you’ll end up with an amphitheater effect. Glass would also separate people physically, but would still allow for visual distractions. Ideally we want to maximize collaboration opportunity and minimize distractions.

                                                                                          A good break room is also important, otherwise break time will happen at desks.

                                                                                          1. 3

                                                                                            They will pry the carpet in our open space office from my cold, dead hands. We are the last place with it and we are not going to give it up. It softens the noise so much!

                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                              Ahh, good point about the glass reflecting sound - I suppose a lot of the sound blocking I experience in my house could be due to the window reflecting outside noise back, not the double-glazing.

                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                            Would cubicles be better? That’s one cost efficient way to turn an office to a non-open office, I think 🤔

                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                              Cubes combine the distracting background noise of an open plan office with having to sit by yourself :/

                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                Cubicles are far better than open offices in my opinion.

                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                  Agreed - while headphones can at least block out audible distractions in an open-office plan, there’s nothing to be done for people shooting hoops and reenacting last night’s Warriors game, or people trying to circumvent my “do not disturb” notice on Slack by waving their hands in front of my monitor (both actual examples at $OLDJOB). Visual distractions, at least for me, are just as bad!

                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                    Not really. Noise is way more disturbing if you can’t see it’s source, apparently.

                                                                                                1. 3
                                                                                                  1. Finishing Subnautica.
                                                                                                  2. Having a pizza & wine with my wife somewhere outside.
                                                                                                  3. Getting used to TaskWarrior.
                                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                                    Actually, the way the keyservers were designed was just lazy. Even DNS has a mechanism for automatic expiration of worthless names. There are my 2 public keys from 2006 I have lost the private keys for a long time ago that are not helping anything. If the users were supposed to upload or prolong their keys every year or so, the situation would be much better. And take them down, provided they still have access to their private keys.

                                                                                                    1. 1

                                                                                                      Context variables sound good, I really liked them in Racket. UTF-8 is a sane default for IO, so nice on that front too.

                                                                                                      1. 14

                                                                                                        This blog post: a case study in being a jerk to someone who is being a jerk, only since Linus is a “jerk” you get off scott-free. Unsurprisingly, this is written by someone who has never contributed to the Linux kernel and who was uninvolved in the discussion he’s picking apart.

                                                                                                        The revised email at the end does lose information. Contrary to what hipsters write blog posts complaining about, 99% of Linus’s emails are cordial. The information that’s lost is the conveyance that this is more important to Linus than most subjects.

                                                                                                        1. 20

                                                                                                          This comment: a case study in being a jerk to someone who is being a jerk to a jerk.

                                                                                                          In all seriousness, I don’t believe that Gary Bernhardt is being a jerk at all. There’s a line between being critical of a piece of work and calling someone brain damaged, and hopefully, we all can see the difference.

                                                                                                          Aside: I love when people use the word “hipster” to invalidate other viewpoints. Apparently, there are two modes of being: Being Right and Being A Hipster.

                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                            To the unserious comment, I don’t think I was being a jerk. I called him a jerk, which I guess you could argue is a jerk move under any circumstances, but if I’m being a jerk then so is Gary.

                                                                                                            To the serious comment, I just want to note that “brain damaged” is a meme among old school hackers which isn’t as strong of a word as you think.

                                                                                                            To the aside, I don’t use hipster as an insult or to imply wrongness, but I do use it to invalidate his point. Gary is a Ruby developer. Linus is a kernel developer. The worlds are far removed from each other.

                                                                                                            1. 50

                                                                                                              I’ve put tens of thousands of lines of C into production, including multiple Linux kernel drivers. In one case, those kernel drivers were critical-path code on a device used in strain testing the wings of an airplane that you might’ve flown in by now.

                                                                                                              I’m not a stranger to the kernel; I just left that world. Behavior like Linus’ in that email was part of the reason, though far from the only reason.

                                                                                                              With all of that said: having written a bunch of systems software shouldn’t be a prerequisite for suggesting that we avoid attacking people personally when they make programming mistakes, or what we suspect are programming mistakes.

                                                                                                              1. 10

                                                                                                                Exactly. I’ve also met many people that do high-performance, embedded, and/or safety-critical code in C that are more polite in these situations. Linus’ attitude is a separate issue from what’s necessary to evaluate and constructively criticize code.

                                                                                                              2. 17

                                                                                                                “brain damaged” is a meme among old school hackers which isn’t as strong of a word as you think.

                                                                                                                Yikes. That “meme” is a whole other thing I don’t even care to unpack right now.

                                                                                                                I don’t use hipster as an insult or to imply wrongness, but I do use it to invalidate his point. Gary is a Ruby developer. Linus is a kernel developer. The worlds are far removed from each other.

                                                                                                                Gotcha. Kernal developer == real old-school hacker. Ruby developer == script kiddie hipster. Are we really still having this argument in 2018?

                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                  Yikes. That “meme” is a whole other thing I don’t even care to unpack right now.

                                                                                                                  “Brain damaged” is a term from back in the Multics days, Linus didn’t make that one up for the occasion. If you’re unfamiliar with the “jargon file” aka hacker dictionary, you can see the history of this particular term here: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/B/brain-damaged.html

                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                    Yikes. That “meme” is a whole other thing I don’t even care to unpack right now.

                                                                                                                    Listen, cultures are different and culture shock is a thing. I’m in a thread full of foreigners shocked that customs are different elsewhere. You better just take my word for it on “brain damaged” because you clearly aren’t a member of this culture and don’t know what you’re talking about.

                                                                                                                    Gotcha. Kernal developer == real old-school hacker. Ruby developer == script kiddie hipster. Are we really still having this argument in 2018?

                                                                                                                    How about you quit putting words in my mouth? Do you really need me to explain the world of difference between Ruby development and kernel hacking? In 2018? It’s not a matter of skill. Gary is great at what he does, but it has almost nothing to do with what Linus does. The people who surround Gary and the people who surround Linus are mutually exclusive groups with different cultural norms.

                                                                                                                    1. 21

                                                                                                                      You can’t use “it’s our culture” as a panacea; calling someone an idiot, moron etc. is a deliberate attempt to hurt them. I guess if what you’re saying is, “it’s our culture to intentionally hurt the feelings of people who have bad ideas,” well, then we might be at an impasse.

                                                                                                                      1. 22

                                                                                                                        The kind of toxic exclusivity and “old school hacker culture” elitism that you’re spouting in this thread is not what I expect to see on Lobsters. It makes me genuinely sad to see somebody saying these things and it also makes me apprehensive of ever being involved in the same project or community as you. Software development today is not what it was 20 –or even 5– years ago. Today it is far more about people than it is about software or technology. You may not like this, but it is the reality.

                                                                                                                        1. 7

                                                                                                                          Lobste.rs always had a few vocal people like this in threads. But note that they’re in the minority and generally are not upvoted as much as the people who aren’t elitist, racist, or just generally being a jerk.

                                                                                                                          1. 5

                                                                                                                            “old school hacker culture” elitism

                                                                                                                            Near 40, I can agree to be called old. But not elitist.
                                                                                                                            And I cannot accept to be associated with racist.

                                                                                                                            Not all software developers are hackers. Not all hackers are software developers.

                                                                                                                            Is stating this “elitism”? Is it “racism”? Is it being “jerk”?
                                                                                                                            Or is just using terms properly?

                                                                                                                2. 5

                                                                                                                  The information that’s lost is the conveyance that this is more important to Linus than most subjects.

                                                                                                                  So add “I want to stress that this issue is really important to me” at the end of the revised email.

                                                                                                                  I think that making an issue out of this particular information being lost is missing the point - that it would be possible to say the same thing as Linus did without being abusive.

                                                                                                                  Contrary to what hipsters write blog posts complaining about

                                                                                                                  You’re falling into the same trap that the post discusses. This derision isn’t necessary to make your point, and doesn’t make it any stronger - it just adds an unnecessary insult.

                                                                                                                  1. 9

                                                                                                                    Contrary to what hipsters write blog posts complaining about, 99% of Linus’s emails are cordial.

                                                                                                                    That may well be true, but do we need that last 1% in a professional setting?

                                                                                                                    1. 9

                                                                                                                      (I am not defending Linus’ behaviour here, please don’t put those words in my mouth.)

                                                                                                                      I strongly take issue with American ideas of “professionalism”, and an even more so with the idea that we get to decide whether this project is “a professional setting” or not. What exactly makes this a “professional setting”? What is a “professional setting”? Why do we hold some interactions to higher standards than others?

                                                                                                                      I suspect “money changing hands” is the thing that makes this “a professional setting”, and that grinds my gears even further. Why are we supposed to hold ourselves to different standards just because some people are getting paid for doing it?

                                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                                        Right, “professionalism” implies that you only need to be nice to somebody when you want them to something for you or want their money. This should actually be about “respect”, whether or not you want a Linux contributor to do something for you or want their money.

                                                                                                                      2. 12

                                                                                                                        The Linux kernel is not a professional setting. Besides, I argue that the 1% is useful, even in a professional setting - sometimes strong words are called for. I’ll be That Guy and say that people should grow a thicker skin, especially people who weren’t even the subject of the email and have never been involved in kernel development.

                                                                                                                        1. 14

                                                                                                                          If I look at who the contributors to the Linux kernel are, it would certainly appear to be a professional endeavor.

                                                                                                                          A large chunk of contributions to the kernel are made by people who are getting paid by the companies they work for to contribute. Sounds like a professional setting to me.

                                                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                                                            Linux development is only “a professional endeavour” (which is a phrase I have strong issues with, see above) because some people decided to build their businesses in Linus’ craft room. We can like or dislike Linus’ behaviour, but we don’t get to ascribe “professionalism” or lack thereof (if there even is such a thing) to Linus’ work or behaviour, or that of any of the contributors.

                                                                                                                            Even if “professionalism” is an actual thing (it’s not; it’s just a tool used by people in power to keep others down) it’s between the people doing the paying, and the people getting the pay, and has nothing to do with any of us.

                                                                                                                            This idea that people should behave differently when there’s money involved is completely offensive to me.

                                                                                                                            1. 7

                                                                                                                              But it’s not. It’s a collaboration between everyone, including professionals and hobbyists. The largest group of kernel contributors are volunteers. On top of that, Linus doesn’t have to answer to anyone.

                                                                                                                              1. 8

                                                                                                                                So, having a hobbyist involved means that you can be dickhead? Is that the conclusion that should be drawn from your statements?

                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                  No. I’m saying that Linus is not a dickhead, Linux is not a professional endeavour, and neither should be held to contrived professional standards.

                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                    “I’m saying that Linus is not a dickhead”

                                                                                                                                    His comments are proving otherwise given the main article shows the same information could’ve been conveyed without all the profanity, personal insults, and so on. He must be adding that fluff because he enjoys it or has self-control issues. He’s intentionally or accidentally a dick. I say that as a satirist whose a dick to people that give me headaches in real life. Although it doesn’t take one to know one, being someone whose always countering dicks and assholes with some dickish habits of his own makes what Linus is doing more evident. If no mental illness, there’s little excuse past him not giving a shit.

                                                                                                                                    1. 5

                                                                                                                                      “doesn’t behave according to my cultural norms” == “mental illness”

                                                                                                                                      Seriously?

                                                                                                                                      I would really appreciate it if you could stop expecting that your cultural norms have to apply to everyone on the planet.

                                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                                        Im identifying the cultural norm of being an asshole, saying it applies to him at times, and saying the project would benefit if he knocked if off. Im not forcing my norms on anyone.

                                                                                                                                        Your comment is more amusing giving someone with Linus’s norns might just reply with profanity and personsl insults. Then, you might be complaining about that. ;)

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          Then, you might be complaining about that. ;)

                                                                                                                                          No, I’d just accept that people from different cultures behave differently.

                                                                                                                                          Let’s face it, most people hate getting told they are wrong, regardless of the tone. That’s just how we are as humans.

                                                                                                                                          Taking offense about the tone just seems very US-specific, as they are accustomed to receiving some special superpowers in a discussion by uttering “I’m offended”.

                                                                                                                                          Some of the best feedback I received in my life wouldn’t be considered acceptable by US standards and I simply don’t care – I just appreciate the fact that someone took his time to spell out the technical problems.

                                                                                                                                          Here is a recent example: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/5183#issuecomment-381449546

                                                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                                                            Here is a recent example: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/5183#issuecomment-381449546

                                                                                                                                            I’m not familiar with Rust, so maybe I’m missing crucial context, but I read this feedback as firm but unproblematic overall. Compared to Linus’ email:

                                                                                                                                            • Comment admits that there are multiple points of view, gives case for their take on it.
                                                                                                                                            • Focuses on the problems at hand rather than speculating on characteristics of any individuals involved, beyond acknowledging other viewpoints.
                                                                                                                                            • Doesn’t include any personal insults.
                                                                                                                                            • Doesn’t include any profanity that I noticed, certainly not gratuituous profanity.

                                                                                                                                            It could be nicer, sure. But it seemed respectful, in the “you can do what you’re doing but consider these things:” kind of way…? The author event went out of their way to acknowledge being unconstructive.

                                                                                                                                            To my reading it seemed closer to Gary’s email than Linus’.

                                                                                                                                            To put it another way: if Linus wrote emails like this (only shorter, probably) then I don’t think Gary would have written a blog post about it.

                                                                                                                                            (For the record: I’m not American, but I do fall on the gee-it’d-be-great-if-Linus-stopped-abusing-his-colleagues side of this debate.)

                                                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                                                              I didn’t intend to imply that this was comparable to Linus’ mail, but that people who would be offended by Linus’ writing would also be offended by that comment.

                                                                                                                                              It’s a slippery slide where every honest-to-go comment that expresses real feelings starts getting replaced by “this is an interesting idea, but did you consider …” corporate lingo, even if the code is horribly wrong.

                                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                                I didn’t intend to imply that this was comparable to Linus’ mail, but that people who would be offended by Linus’ writing would also be offended by that comment.

                                                                                                                                                I understand this is your point, but I think there is no evidence for this. The people complaining about Linus’ conduct are complaining about specific things, and these things are not present in the comment you linked.

                                                                                                                                                Did anyone in the Rust community (generally considered a “nicer” community than kernel development) raise concerns about this comment?

                                                                                                                                                There is a difference between “not overtly nice” and “openly abusive”, even accounting for cultural context.

                                                                                                                                            2. 1

                                                                                                                                              Then you and I arent that different in how we look at stuff. Ive just layered on top of it a push for project owners to do what’s most effective on social side.

                                                                                                                                        2. 2

                                                                                                                                          I believe it’s intentional. He does not want to be bothered by nurturing the newbs, so he deters them from going to him directly and forces them to do their learning elsewhere.

                                                                                                                                        3. 2

                                                                                                                                          These numbers suggest it is a professional endeavor:

                                                                                                                                          https://thenewstack.io/contributes-linux-kernel/

                                                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                                                            Those numbers just break down the professionals involved, and don’t consider the volunteers. If you sum the percentages in that article you get around 40%. Even accomodating for smaller companies that didn’t make the top N companies, that’s a pretty big discrepancy.

                                                                                                                                  2. 6

                                                                                                                                    Linus himself is working in a professional capacity. He’s employed by the Linux Foundation to work on Linux. The fact he is employed to work on an open source project that he founded doesn’t make that situation non-professional.

                                                                                                                              1. -5

                                                                                                                                It is only a disaster if your business relies on making use of other people work, in which they own the copyright.

                                                                                                                                Not everybody can afford to create stuff and give it away for free, and there are plenty of people who want to earn money from there creative work.

                                                                                                                                Those who have made a living from steeling other peoples’ material are up in arms that their free lunch not going to be free anymore.

                                                                                                                                1. 17

                                                                                                                                  Or you run any kind of site where users can input anything that another visitor can see. Not just video and file sharing sites; Lobsters users could paste copyrighted content into a comment/PM and I’d be liable for not having a system implementing some kind of copyright controls.

                                                                                                                                  (To say nothing of Article 11 wanting us to start paying the news sites we link to for privilege of sending them traffic.)

                                                                                                                                  1. -2

                                                                                                                                    If somebody posted something here that I owned the copyright to, and I asked Lobsters admin to remove the material, then I imagine they would. If somebody kept posting this material they could be banned.

                                                                                                                                    Or are you saying that the Lobsters’ site should be a place where anybody can post copyright material, without any recourse by the copyright holder?

                                                                                                                                    1. 13

                                                                                                                                      The new law changes this standard safe harbor behavior. Lobsters (me) is presumptively at fault for copyright infringement for not proactively checking for possibly-copyrighted material before posting. So yes, your scenario is the current, reasonable law and accurately describes why everyone is concerned about this change.

                                                                                                                                      1. -2

                                                                                                                                        Lots of FUD being generated by those who will lose out. Copyright holders not making much noise about the fact they will probably make some money (or rather lose less).

                                                                                                                                        Some good points about what is going on.

                                                                                                                                      2. 4

                                                                                                                                        The law isn’t about that, though. The new law doesn’t say admins must take-down on request (that’s already the case under existing law) but rather that they must have an AI system that prevents any infringing uploads from happening in the first place.

                                                                                                                                        The link tax is a much bigger problem, especially lobsters, but both articles are very bad.

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          AI system that prevents any infringing uploads from happening in the first place.

                                                                                                                                          How is that any different from what @pushcx said? As the owner/operator of lobste.rs he would have to abide by this law and produce, or buy access to some sort of copyrighted work database in order to test for it for all content that is created on lobsters.

                                                                                                                                          That’s not going to make it easy for startups. That’s not going to make it easy for privately owned, independent side projects. That’s just going to hurt.

                                                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                                                            ALSO, you’d better not quote any part of my message if you reply, because I could, apparently, legitimately sue lobsters for not enforcing my copyright. e.g. there’s no such thing as fair use anymore.

                                                                                                                                            (yes, that’s a stretch, but that seems to be the basic threat)

                                                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                                                              I replied before @pushcx and yes, it seems we agree on how bad it is :)

                                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                                Blargh! I am sorry. I misread the thread and thought you were replying to pushcx.

                                                                                                                                      3. 6

                                                                                                                                        Or lobster gets a fine when you submit a link to any European news sites.

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          What’s worse is that people will devise a way to signal what content is linkable and what only with license. This will limit quality news dissemination and strengthen fake news position. This will help to kill EU. Sad, right?

                                                                                                                                        2. 1

                                                                                                                                          most probably that lobster will be not able to post most of the links

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          The OP have missed being knowledgeable in copyright law as well as laws related to personal information protection.