Bruno Ferreira is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware. He has decades of experience with PC hardware and assorted sundries, alongside a career as a developer. He's obsessed with detail and has a tendency to ramble on the topics he loves. When not doing that, he's usually playing games, or at live music shows and festivals. ","collapsible":{"enabled":true,"maxHeight":250,"readMoreText":"Read more","readLessText":"Read less"}}), "https://slice.vanilla.futurecdn.net/13-4-13/js/authorBio.js"); } else { console.error('%c FTE ','background: #9306F9; color: #ffffff','no lazy slice hydration function available'); } Bruno Ferreira Contributor Bruno Ferreira is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware. He has decades of experience with PC hardware and assorted sundries, alongside a career as a developer. He's obsessed with detail and has a tendency to ramble on the topics he loves. When not doing that, he's usually playing games, or at live music shows and festivals.
abufrejoval I've always felt and argued that Linus' primary quality is his ability to produce good social code via decision making and supporting a culture, rather than programming computer code. One of his first such decisions was to recognize that others were better at writing operating system code and to offer his code to full replacement. And he is now repeating the very same concept on a meta level, just what I'd have expected and I quite sincerely admire. I don't praise easily: they say it spoils character… Reply
praz01 abufrejoval said: I've always felt and argued that Linus' primary quality is his ability to produce good social code via decision making and supporting a culture, rather than programming computer code. One of his first such decisions was to recognize that others were better at writing operating system code and to offer his code to full replacement. And he is now repeating the very same concept on a meta level, just what I'd have expected and I quite sincerely admire. I don't praise easily: they say it spoils character… "recognize that others were better at writing operating system." I'm going to take this sentence purposely out of context to mention that Torvalds' notorious for rejecting pull requests (code changes), on some occasions lashing out in less than civil manner (non-pc)! The Linux Foundation code of conduct solely exists to keep Linus' in check. Reply
abufrejoval praz01 said: "recognize that others were better at writing operating system." I'm going to take this sentence purposely out of context to mention that Torvalds' notorious for rejecting pull requests (code changes), on some occasions lashing out in less than civil manner (non-pc)! The Linux Foundation code of conduct solely exists to keep Linus' in check. I knew this was going to come 😉 But even there he reformed much better than I might have done in his place.. so there! Reply
bit_user praz01 said: "recognize that others were better at writing operating system." I'm going to take this sentence purposely out of context to mention that Torvalds' notorious for rejecting pull requests (code changes), on some occasions lashing out in less than civil manner (non-pc)! The Linux Foundation code of conduct solely exists to keep Linus' in check. I've read several of his rants and they generally make sense to me. I'd rather someone be in charge who's not afraid to give the blunt, honest truth and doesn't waste lots of time and words talking around the real issue than someone who's a mere politician. There's lots of conventional wisdom about projects that are "designed by committee" and it's widely held to be a bad way to go. IMO, if you get someone who's too much of a politician in charge, you end up with something similar. For all the Linus-bashing, you can't argue with Linux' success. So far, we can only imagine how it would've fared under a different style of leadership. Reply
DS426 There's Linus bashers and then cult-like followers, with the rest of us somewhere in the middle (or rather not caring at all). Indeed many of us would have much bigger egos and try to benefit personally more from being in this position. As for this succession planning, I'm surprised this hasn't been done already. Failing to plan is planning to fail, and that could have very well happened. Linus would remain at the top of the pyramid as long as he wishes (and is alive), so there's no real downside to finding and determining successors. Linux deserves and needs the resiliency of an even more robust organization, even as great as it's community structure is. Plenty of technical competence at upper leadership levels but long-term strategy and vision is still an afterthought (or finally catching up as the "gray old man" and others ponder these things), even as the Linux Foundation's aim was to provide those things. Reply
bit_user DS426 said: As for this succession planning, I'm surprised this hasn't been done already. Yeah, I'd have expected it to be near the top of Linux Foundation's priorities, upon its founding. Reply
randomizer praz01 said: "recognize that others were better at writing operating system." I'm going to take this sentence purposely out of context to mention that Torvalds' notorious for rejecting pull requests (code changes), on some occasions lashing out in less than civil manner (non-pc)! The Linux Foundation code of conduct solely exists to keep Linus' in check. Others were better, but not those others. 🙂 Reply
abufrejoval bit_user said: I've read several of his rants and they generally make sense to me. I'd rather someone be in charge who's not afraid to give the blunt, honest truth and doesn't waste lots of time and words talking around the real issue than someone who's a mere politician. There's lots of conventional wisdom about projects that are "designed by committee" and it's widely held to be a bad way to go. IMO, if you get someone who's too much of a politician in charge, you end up with something similar. For all the Linus-bashing, you can't argue with Linux' success. So far, we can only imagine how it would've fared under a different style of leadership. Last time I clashed with Linus was when I was working on my CS thesis, writing a Unix emulator for a micro-kernel OS that unfortunately wasn't open source. At the time Linux was still almost unusable (as Jochen Liedke, working in the same German research organization as I would explain in more detail later), BSD386 was clearly far ahead of Linux in the Unixoid camp (I myself was running a Unixware System V.4 on my 80486), while micokernels were clearly the way to go in the distributed OS environmnet I was working on: this was the day and age of the Transputer where parallelism was moved right into the programming language via Occam, and there was also QNX, Chorus, Mosix and Minix to challenge the monolithic Multics cast-offs. I don't recall the exact topic, but it must have been philosophical and I was quite clearly off into a far more "federal" distribution of the "God like" view of the self contained Unix-verse. What I remember is that we met, battled and left the battleground, without reconciling our differences, but with our mutual respect intact, quite in line with the critical rationalism lemma, that many disputes cannot be resolved by reasoning, as they are based on atomic beliefs. "Agree to disagree" and then try to do our best in our separate fields of responsibility was the vibe we shared, that's the part we'd probably agree on still today. Being right doesn't mean you'll have a lot of friends: unfortunately you have to decide if you'll spend your limited intellectual budget into diplomacy or solidifying your science. And since that's been true even for true geniuses like Mozart, how can far lesser minds hope to do better? Reply
abufrejoval DS426 said: As for this succession planning, I'm surprised this hasn't been done already. Failing to plan is planning to fail, and that could have very well happened. Linus would remain at the top of the pyramid as long as he wishes (and is alive), so there's no real downside to finding and determining successors. Linux deserves and needs the resiliency of an even more robust organization, even as great as it's community structure is. He's preached his succession gospel for decades, the principles were well established and he didn't deviate. It may just not have been as public and explicit. All that was done was solidifying those principles into actual near algorithmic rules, since he judged that the probabilities around his ability to continue the job were shifting: again, another sign of his ability for excellent judgment in my view. Reply
Key considerations
- Investor positioning can change fast
- Volatility remains possible near catalysts
- Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows
Reference reading
- https://www.tomshardware.com/software/linux/SPONSORED_LINK_URL
- https://www.tomshardware.com/software/linux/linux-kernel-community-draws-up-contingency-plan-to-replace-linus-torvalds-should-the-need-arise-only-34-years-in-the-making#main
- https://www.tomshardware.com
- Grab this 1440p Samsung Odyssey gaming monitor at its lowest-ever price, just $159 — save big on this IPS display with a fast 200Hz refresh rate
- The Stout Owl: How I Built the Ultimate Noctua G2 PC
- 'Thermodynamic computing' could slash energy use of AI image generation by a factor of ten billion, study claims — prototypes show promise but huge task require
- AI-assisted cybersecurity team discovers 12 OpenSSL vulnerabilities, claims humans are the limiting factor — some vulnerabilities have been around for decades
- Big three memory chip manufacturers policing customers to prevent hoarding — employee says industry relationships ‘matter in a crunch’
Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.