- cross-posted to:
- linux
- cross-posted to:
- linux
You must log in or register to comment.
personally i don’t agree with sanctioning foss communities.
but fuckit, bring on more forks i say.
among other benefits, the scifi-type scenario of nations trying to patch eachothers backdoors and slip in new backdoors (and hopefully innovations). could make for an exciting OS space-race type scenario
personally i don’t agree with sanctioning foss communities.
Foss communities aren’t being sanctioned. Whole countries are. It’s the same limitation whatever enterprise you’re in.
If Olympians have to renounce their country to take part in global competition, why do you not think a software developer wouldn’t have to do the same to be involved in a global project?
this is a complex topic and probably belongs in a different thread.
essentially i don’t personally believe in punishing citizens of a country for the actions of its politicians.
at best its misguided, at worse it basically empowers politicians on both sides who draw power from friction between citizens of different nations. typical divide and conquer bs.
why do you not think a software developer wouldn’t have to
wouldn’t or shouldn’t? if you mean wouldn’t, it’s not surprising and its not the dev’s fault they have to comply with policy, so the criticism is not with them.
if you mean shouldn’t, i don’t agree with punishing athletes either, but regarding foss specifically, isn’t the “friendly competition” of olympics equivalent to that? sort of. in some ways yes. in other ways its actually the opposite.
collaboration is actually the opposite of competition.
and while there’s a case for the benefits of healthy sports competition, i don’t believe it truly fulfills the spirit of international goodwill to the degree it says on the packaging. foss and other forms of international collaboration for the betterment of greater society are definitely on a higher rung - in my opinion at least.
Probably better for BRICS countries to consider contributing to something different.
Realistically there’s no feasible way for the US to block access to use the kernel, and even a soft fork of it will be laughably easy for glowies to exploit. There are a bunch of promising kernels that could be well suited for China and Russia’s push towards RISC and ARM independence, whereas in Linux they’d be tasked with maintaining drivers and other systems that are a massive security vulnerability if you don’t have total control over them.
I’d honestly even consider it a good idea for Russia to get the FSF to fight this considering it’s a blatant violation of the GPL. Even if the president can just say whatever they like, at least you can make it embarrassing and expensive for the chauvinists gloating at the labour they exploited for years.
It’ll be called BRICS Linux.
deleted by creator
It doesn’t. Russians are still free to use and contribute to Linux development. Just a few people lost their maintainer rights.
Russians are still free to use and contribute to Linux development. Just a few people lost their maintainer rights.
Yeah… Russians lost rights. A bit of a catch-22 there, pal.
deleted by creator
Please don’t…
Can we organize and force the Linux Foundation and/or OFAC to exclude open source software from these sanctions? Is anyone doing that yet?
What would be the point of the sanctions then? If the Linux Foundation were against it they could move the infrastructure to an other jurisdiction which does not sanctize countries, that would carry a strong message. But if they refuse to do that, what’s wrong with others’ forking it and doing it? That’s the point of opensource.
Lol! Why should software get an exception over any other industry?
Even this top level comment is so blatantly misunderstanding the concept of open source software that no one will bother engaging with it properly.
Americans should vote for Trump, he’s the best chance to overturn these ludicrous sanctions.
No.
I get where you’re coming from… but no. Forking linux is way less dangerous for the world than Trump in the White House.
I guess it’s the case of аксиома Эскобара, tbh
For those who don’t know about Escobar’s axiom: https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/escobars-axiom-of-choice-1
its quality will not be lower than usa linux, as they will pull latest development but not push back (to the linux list)
The fork has no hope of survival. Are you telling me Russia’s Ministry of Digital Development can maintain a project of this size? lol, rofl even.
They can pull patches from mainstream Linux if they can’t keep up themselves. The project is big but not too big.
Disregarding the parent comment, but hosting a soft fork is easy enough but it’ll quickly become a spaghetti mess of local patches that conflict with upstream changes. It’s not like there’s an argument for preserving access to Russia either since the nature of the kernel being hosted across torrent trackers makes it impossible to deny Linux to any one country.
It seems like the better solution (imo) is to work on a different kernel receptive of these maintainers, so that the companies employing them can still have a kernel that is developed for their use-cases whilst supporting projects that don’t so openly collaborate with hostile states.
whilst supporting projects that don’t so openly collaborate with hostile states.
Geopolitical propaganda spotted. Reporting…
No, but they can host the infrastructure so that excluded developers (the ones that just so happen to be Russian) along with whomever will want (BRICS developers for instance) can surely contribute.
Why wouldn’t they be able to. Russia has a lot of tech talent, and tends to top programming competitions. Also, if this happened I imagine other countries like China would collaborate as well. China alone has a bigger population than all of the west, and a better education system to boot.
