After Years of Abusive E-mails, the Creator of Linux Steps Aside(newyorker.com)
newyorker.com
After Years of Abusive E-mails, the Creator of Linux Steps Aside
https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/after-years-of-abusive-e-mails-the-creator-of-linux-steps-aside#
63 comments
Extensive discussion a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18000698
The first time I've seen it reported that Linus was compensated 1.6M. (not related to the subject of abusive behavior)
I'd also like to say as a manager of a bunch of top notch woman engineers, we don't have an abusive environment, we don't have a frat boy environment, and it's friggin awesome. (and we are hiring, PM me :) )
I'd also like to say as a manager of a bunch of top notch woman engineers, we don't have an abusive environment, we don't have a frat boy environment, and it's friggin awesome. (and we are hiring, PM me :) )
Also first I've heard that the New Yorker was directly involved in the decision:
Torvalds’s decision to step aside came after The New Yorker asked him a series of questions about his conduct for a story on complaints about his abusive behavior discouraging women from working as Linux-kernel programmers.
On the topic of women engineers and also as a manager of top-notch woman engineers: wholly agree. For the Moneyball readers, I sometimes joke that women engineers are the Greek Gods of Walks when it comes to software development. Which is really just another way of saying that characteristics traditionally associated with women correlate in my experience with skills that are often underestimated in software development and evaluating them with brogrammer-world biases is a competitive disadvantage.
Torvalds’s decision to step aside came after The New Yorker asked him a series of questions about his conduct for a story on complaints about his abusive behavior discouraging women from working as Linux-kernel programmers.
On the topic of women engineers and also as a manager of top-notch woman engineers: wholly agree. For the Moneyball readers, I sometimes joke that women engineers are the Greek Gods of Walks when it comes to software development. Which is really just another way of saying that characteristics traditionally associated with women correlate in my experience with skills that are often underestimated in software development and evaluating them with brogrammer-world biases is a competitive disadvantage.
The no-context Linus quotes and the outlining of how he gets paid made this article seem like somewhat of a hatchet job meant to milk clicks out of the #MeToo movement, which I otherwise have no problem with.
You can PM on HN?
Discussions on this topic have descended into culture war elsewhere and been shut down.
It would be great if at least one thread could discuss how management of software projects can evolve to better serve all contributors instead of people digging trenches.
I am guilty of enjoying Linus tirades, especially when he is making technical arguments. I think a lot of people use colourful language as emphasis. I don't subscribe to the idea that women are delicate flowers and need to be protected from a bit of swearing. Adults in general shouldn't be wrapped in cotton wool. But Linux hasn't been a hobby project for ages and development discussions are open and archived and improving the quality of discourse there is worthwhile. If Linus can learn to communicate better, while maintaining his honesty and passion it will benefit everyone, himself included.
I am a bit disappointed that this has been mixed up with gender politics because it seems to me that the lack of representation by gender, race, social position etc is a bigger societal issue and putting any of that back on Linus seems a little unfair.
It would be great if at least one thread could discuss how management of software projects can evolve to better serve all contributors instead of people digging trenches.
I am guilty of enjoying Linus tirades, especially when he is making technical arguments. I think a lot of people use colourful language as emphasis. I don't subscribe to the idea that women are delicate flowers and need to be protected from a bit of swearing. Adults in general shouldn't be wrapped in cotton wool. But Linux hasn't been a hobby project for ages and development discussions are open and archived and improving the quality of discourse there is worthwhile. If Linus can learn to communicate better, while maintaining his honesty and passion it will benefit everyone, himself included.
I am a bit disappointed that this has been mixed up with gender politics because it seems to me that the lack of representation by gender, race, social position etc is a bigger societal issue and putting any of that back on Linus seems a little unfair.
> I don't subscribe to the idea that women are delicate flowers and need to be protected from a bit of swearing.
You're right that women - like anyone - are generally capable of dealing with a harsh environment, but the difference is women are penalized for doing so.
The most effective way to operate in a harsh environment is to match it. If busting balls is the way your peers call attention to a technical issue, then when you want someone to pay attention, you'll bust their balls. If someone challenges you in a rude way, often a rude rebuttal is the most effective response.
Women can do that just as well as anyone else, but the problem is when they do, they're judged more harshly. This isn't a question of corporate policy, but of human socialization. We all unconsciously expect women to be more mild and agreeable. So when they are rude, profane, or combative, we notice it much more readily and it provokes a stronger emotional reaction. People are much more likely to write them off as "unprofessional" or "drama". This in turn closes off one of the main options for dealing with a harsh environment.
There are two possible solutions to this: fix human socialization so that people no longer have involuntary unconscious biases about combative women, or simply cultivate an environment that discourages everyone from being combative, so we can avoid the issue and get back to building stuff.
The former would be ideal, but it requires broad sweeping social change (and a lot of time). Until that can happen, we unfortunately have to settle for the latter.
You're right that women - like anyone - are generally capable of dealing with a harsh environment, but the difference is women are penalized for doing so.
The most effective way to operate in a harsh environment is to match it. If busting balls is the way your peers call attention to a technical issue, then when you want someone to pay attention, you'll bust their balls. If someone challenges you in a rude way, often a rude rebuttal is the most effective response.
Women can do that just as well as anyone else, but the problem is when they do, they're judged more harshly. This isn't a question of corporate policy, but of human socialization. We all unconsciously expect women to be more mild and agreeable. So when they are rude, profane, or combative, we notice it much more readily and it provokes a stronger emotional reaction. People are much more likely to write them off as "unprofessional" or "drama". This in turn closes off one of the main options for dealing with a harsh environment.
There are two possible solutions to this: fix human socialization so that people no longer have involuntary unconscious biases about combative women, or simply cultivate an environment that discourages everyone from being combative, so we can avoid the issue and get back to building stuff.
The former would be ideal, but it requires broad sweeping social change (and a lot of time). Until that can happen, we unfortunately have to settle for the latter.
> I think a lot of people use colourful language as emphasis.
You do not need to curse in a professional environment, full stop.
Letting a word fly out by mistake is one thing, it can happen to anyone. But overwhelming your emails, messages, and speech with curse words when it's completely and utterly unnecessary and can make people uncomfortable is unacceptable. We're all adults here, you need to be able to control your language and not make excuses for it.
In terms of lack of representation I don't see how they are not mixed up. When you're already the outsider/minority things like this just serve to further reinforce that feeling of not belonging. It is just another source of friction that reinforces the cycle of under-representation and if your goal is to break that cycle then making the environment as inclusive as possible is certainly something you need to deal with.
You do not need to curse in a professional environment, full stop.
Letting a word fly out by mistake is one thing, it can happen to anyone. But overwhelming your emails, messages, and speech with curse words when it's completely and utterly unnecessary and can make people uncomfortable is unacceptable. We're all adults here, you need to be able to control your language and not make excuses for it.
In terms of lack of representation I don't see how they are not mixed up. When you're already the outsider/minority things like this just serve to further reinforce that feeling of not belonging. It is just another source of friction that reinforces the cycle of under-representation and if your goal is to break that cycle then making the environment as inclusive as possible is certainly something you need to deal with.
My experiences as a leader have shown me, time and time again, that people respond far better to praising what they did right, rather than excessively focusing on the negative. If Linus is serious about this, it's going to ultimately make Linux even better.
Good read - "Negative Feedback Rarely Leads To Improvement" https://hbr.org/2018/01/negative-feedback-rarely-leads-to-im...
Good read - "Negative Feedback Rarely Leads To Improvement" https://hbr.org/2018/01/negative-feedback-rarely-leads-to-im...
>people respond far better to praising what they did right, rather than excessively focusing on the negative
Interesting. I wonder how much impact all the negative feedback from social media and traditional media had on the timeline of the behavior standards for LKML.
Interesting. I wonder how much impact all the negative feedback from social media and traditional media had on the timeline of the behavior standards for LKML.
This should stay on the homepage. The claim that Linus's recent action was in fact a reaction to their story is new information, that substantially changes conversation. This is not a dupe nor a needless rehash
Avoiding the difficult questions raised by the article, I’d like to keep it simple: I won’t work with someone that thinks it’s okay to tell a coworker to kill themselves, even if it’s hyperbole.
Did you actually read the linked post before posting that? This is the final para:
So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place.
Given the above, do you feel that Mr T is telling a coworker to kill themself or simply sounding off?
As it turns out I do have something to do with security in a distro and yet for some reason I don't feel threatened by Mr T.
So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place.
Given the above, do you feel that Mr T is telling a coworker to kill themself or simply sounding off?
As it turns out I do have something to do with security in a distro and yet for some reason I don't feel threatened by Mr T.
He didn't say it to a co-worker, he said it to a hypothetical person that doesn't actually exist in the real world.
Quote: "So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place."
EDIT: Why is this getting downvoted? Because the truth doesn't fit the narrative?
Quote: "So here's a plea: if you have anything to do with security in a distro, and think that my kids (replace "my kids" with "sales people on the road" if you think your main customers are businesses) need to have the root password to access some wireless network, or to be able to print out a paper, or to change the date-and-time settings, please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place."
EDIT: Why is this getting downvoted? Because the truth doesn't fit the narrative?
Because it's completely OTT. There's a reasonable point in there, but he had to go ruin it. It's like the recent Boris Johnson gaff with "letterboxes". A reasonable point pushed out of sight by bravado.
Because it's the same issue.
At the end of the day Linus is making a very clearcut threat here: "if you harbor a particular idea on this topic then I believe you have no right to exist and should end your life immediately". That's wholly out of bounds in a technical discussion. Especially coming from a person in a position of ultimate power.
First of all, the whole thing is hyperbole. Linus doesn't actually believe people should kill themselves over holding that particular opinion, which no actual person holds anyway.
Secondly, you added that "you have no right to exist" part yourself. It comes from your imagination, not Linus Torvalds.
Lastly, it wasn't a technical discussion. It wasn't on a mailing list. It was a random personal Google Plus post where Linus vented about some annoyance he faced using an actual Linux distribution (OpenSUSE). Obviously he's not in a position of "ultimate power" because he can't force the OpenSUSE guys to change that annoying behavior for him.
Secondly, you added that "you have no right to exist" part yourself. It comes from your imagination, not Linus Torvalds.
Lastly, it wasn't a technical discussion. It wasn't on a mailing list. It was a random personal Google Plus post where Linus vented about some annoyance he faced using an actual Linux distribution (OpenSUSE). Obviously he's not in a position of "ultimate power" because he can't force the OpenSUSE guys to change that annoying behavior for him.
Linus crossed the line long ago and it's good that he's taking a break to reevaluate his actions. It's one thing to be passionate and opinionated but Linus has shown to be a downright asshole in his administration of Linux.
I'm not sure how I feel about this article. On the one hand, it brings to attention an important side effect of the unfriendliness of the community around Linus, namely that it's particularly discouraging to women. On the other hand, the problem is that it's a mean culture with Linus at its core. Based on this article it doesn't sound like he's sexist per se, even though the consequences of his behavior affect women more.
It's a tricky line to draw, especially since many people in tech are openly sexist. At the end of the day, I'm happy with the idea that creating a more civil community will also help address some of the gender issues.
It's a tricky line to draw, especially since many people in tech are openly sexist. At the end of the day, I'm happy with the idea that creating a more civil community will also help address some of the gender issues.
> I'm not sure how I feel about this article. On the one hand, it brings to attention an important side effect of the unfriendliness of the community around Linus, namely that it's particularly discouraging to women.
Why? What does that have to do with women? Linus said nothing about women. If you want to argue that women are hypersensitive and avoid conflict and therefore Linus is discouraging them, say it. Except saying that would be sexist, wouldn't it?
Why? What does that have to do with women? Linus said nothing about women. If you want to argue that women are hypersensitive and avoid conflict and therefore Linus is discouraging them, say it. Except saying that would be sexist, wouldn't it?
I'd argue some people are hypercritical and instigate conflict by gratuitous insult.
Why did this get flagged? I don't see how this article isn't relevant or violates any HN submission rules.
> "Why did this get flagged?"
Submissions (and comments, for that matter) are flagged by members. When enough members flag an item, the [flagged] tag appears.
Asking why an item got flagged is in many ways pointless: as there's no single member responsible, finding an answer more definitive answer than "users flagged it" is nigh impossible.
Speculating, this may have ended up displaying a [flagged] tag because a significant discussion regarding the topic happened very recently (3 days ago, over 2K votes, over 900 comments).[0] The discussion in many ways is contentious and generally produces more heat than light and new insight. Members may feel there's little to be gained by discussing it again.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18000698
Submissions (and comments, for that matter) are flagged by members. When enough members flag an item, the [flagged] tag appears.
Asking why an item got flagged is in many ways pointless: as there's no single member responsible, finding an answer more definitive answer than "users flagged it" is nigh impossible.
Speculating, this may have ended up displaying a [flagged] tag because a significant discussion regarding the topic happened very recently (3 days ago, over 2K votes, over 900 comments).[0] The discussion in many ways is contentious and generally produces more heat than light and new insight. Members may feel there's little to be gained by discussing it again.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18000698
Sexism in tech stories are always immediately flagged off the front page, sadly.
I've never understood why the people who complain about this don't just fork and start a new community, which will a priori be much better (er, right?).
I suppose most people see the sense in a "middle-ground" where you work to improve a community you value instead of abandoning it at the first sight of trouble?
The only developer complaining in the article did in fact abandon the community: https://sage.thesharps.us/2015/10/05/closing-a-door/
Which would you rather have?
A) A guy who thinks you're an idiot, and tells you--to your face--exactly why he thinks you are one.
or...
B) typical open office dweller who also thinks you're an idiot, lacks the stones to tell you in-person, yet somehow manages to have just the right amount of stones to tell everyone else how stupid you are.
All I know is that we have a whole lotta people in this industry with absolutely no business plucking the splinter out of Linus's eye.
A) A guy who thinks you're an idiot, and tells you--to your face--exactly why he thinks you are one.
or...
B) typical open office dweller who also thinks you're an idiot, lacks the stones to tell you in-person, yet somehow manages to have just the right amount of stones to tell everyone else how stupid you are.
All I know is that we have a whole lotta people in this industry with absolutely no business plucking the splinter out of Linus's eye.
homonculus1(3)
zeroname(2)
Just do another fork of linux with some likeable coders... because the world needs more forks
Not all emotions must be pleasant. Why do people think there's something wrong with unpleasant emotions?
Every person is free to experience their own unpleasant emotions. It's not OK to verbally abuse other people just because you can't control those emotions. It's especially offensive with email since it takes time to type and one could make a habit of not hitting send immediately - write a draft and give yourself time to cool off, then edit out the nastiness before sending. If that seems a waste of time, one might learn to just not write the stuff that needs to be removed in the first place just for efficiency sake.
I thought we were talking about abusing others? Someone's rights to feel negative emotions doesn't extend to other people, nor is it right to ask others to bear that cost.
There's nothing wrong with unpleasant emotions. They are necessary. But most people aren't arguing against that. They're arguing against unnecessarily negative or abusive behavior.
There's nothing wrong with having unpleasant emotions, but there can be a lot wrong in how one acts upon them, especially when it affects others.