• tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    51 minutes ago

    It’s called “being a decent human”. It doesn’t take much but the right just can’t comprehend that

    • dafo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 minutes ago

      Hear me out, people who belong to this stupid label “the right” can also hold those values. Shocking, isn’t it? I’ll even out myself as one of those morally apprehensive people of this homogeneous group, which is the exact opposite to the homogeneous group “the left” (because you’re either or, of course), "“the* right”. But I still hold the same values as Linus mentions.

  • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    158
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Just how fucking dense do you have to be in order to be surprised that a man who created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free, might be a leftist?

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 hours ago

      There’s some libertarians in the FOSS community as well, so it’s not a guarantee, but yeah, generally you’ll find that correlation.

    • _____@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Right wingers are extremely stupid and don’t really understand what the left stands for, they fall for all fox news strawman arguments and rage bait.

    • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free

      He didn’t created it alone and “then” gave it away for free. Since it’s begging Linux was free and that created a community who made it the most popular OS.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Yes. It’s called summarizing. Obviously it’s a bit more complicated. I’m not writing an essay on the history of Linux here.

        • Jarix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          We would all settle for you not making idiotic comments that mislead anyone who isn’t already informed about this, you might know them as “the vast majority of people”

      • CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yes, yes, and it’s NT/Windows or as I’ve taken to calling it NT+Windows…

        This point is pedantic and tired to the point that it has become an infamous copypasta.

        It’s also, at least as stated here, not even technically correct. A kernel is an operating system all on it’s own. It just can’t do much.

        GNU just provides the software that the user interacts with.

        Additionally, there are a number of Linux distros that are entirely free of GNU software.

        Just about everyone understands what you mean when you call Linux an OS. The pedantry is unneeded.

        • LeFantome@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 hour ago

          GNU is not even a requirement.

          Look at Void Linux. Look at Alpine Linux. Look at Chimera Linux.

          MUSL instead of Glibc. Clang instead of GCC. Alternative userlands. More and more Linux distros arrive with these traits everyday (many more than I listed).

      • Hobo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

        Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

        There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

    • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 hour ago

      In the USA the republicans simply are such morons currently that anything reasonable appears to be leftist.

      I’m center-right in Austria but US-americans would call me a woke communist (and in many regards I’m more leftist than the democrats).

    • tcrpz@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      7 hours ago

      All it takes to be a leftist these days is to not go out of your way every day to be a raging cunt.

  • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Unfortunately, it’s true: Linux is woke. And DEI. And gay.

    We need to get Elon Musk and the DOGE team on this, stat!

  • maplebar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Wait you mean the guy who made a free and open source operating system for everyone to share is left wing!?!?!? WHAT THE FFUUUU

    • kabi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      7 hours ago

      There are a great number of nutjobs running (F)OSS projects, so I wouldn’t assume much about any software maintainer. Also, Linus explicitly only cites upsides to FOSS that pertain to developing the software itself, not to any greater social effort.

      • maplebar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Don’t undermine the fact that Linus also made Git and I’m pretty sure some scuba diving app. Modern day essentials if you ask me!

        • Meursault@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I don’t think it’s undermining to credit him with exactly what he accomplished. Linus created the kernel, Stallman invented GNU.

          • andros_rex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Why not just post the copy pasta

            I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

            Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

            There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

            • jdeath@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              it’s just copypasta. thanks for posting. but i think it’s just less popular on lemmy

  • x4740N@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    31 minutes ago

    I hate both religon and atheism but agree with everything else Linus has to say

    Edit:

    I would have edited my comment to explain why but the existing downvotes would cast a negative view of any explanation I do give since people online tend to disregard comments with downvotes

    Also the downvotes killed any mental will and motivation to type up and clearly think of an explanation in addition to the reasoning above

    Maybe I’ll come back later and edit my comment again if I actually get that mental will and motivation back but it’s not likely

    • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Atheism includes both those that passionately disagree that gods exist and those that simply do not believe in deities. So you hate both people that believe in deities (religion), and all atheists. I guess you left out non-religious non-theist’s… People who don’t believe in theism but have some kind of pagan belief system.

      That’s a very small ellipsis of the Venn diagram you’re carving out of people you don’t hate.

      Crystal girls that list ‘spiritual but not religious’ on their Tinder?

      • bradd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I can relate to what the person is saying and for me it’s more about people knowing something that they can’t prove.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Wait, do you mean theism and atheism, or explicitly organized religion and atheism?

      Because the first just means you hate /~gestures vaguely~ and the second makes me question how you can hate a lack of belief in something.

      • Knuschberkeks@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 hours ago

        atheism isn’t a lack of belief. Atheists belive that there is no god. Someone who doesn’t believe in either or is an agnostic.

        • HerbSolo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 hours ago

          An agnostic doesn’t believe it’s possible to know if god exists. A gnostic thinks it’s possible.

          Agnosticism is about knowing, atheism about beleiving. So if you don’t know if god exists but firmly believe the idea is a load of crap you’re an agnostic and an atheist.

          • kronisk @lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            49 minutes ago

            To be pedantic, gnosticism is a christian sect from the first centuries BC. γνῶσῐς means “knowledge”, which is where the word agnostic comes from, but the term “gnostic” was already spoken for so to speak.

          • LeFantome@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 hour ago

            For anybody having trouble following…

            Nobody knows if God exists. It is not a proven fact.

            Some people believe that they know. Some of them really, really believe it.

            If you believe something that did not arrive at through hard fact, that is faith. Strong faith is religion.

            So what is being said here is that many atheists are in fact quite religious—they just do not believe in God.

            A good test is to explain the difference between agnostic and atheist. Anybody that insists on calling themself an atheist after that has is acting on faith ( not fact ) and has religion.

            • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 hour ago

              Prove that the Jersey devil doesn’t exist. Do that, and you will have made me into a religious atheist and we’ll all point and laugh at me.

              Or, is it only reasonable to give these special privileges to some hypotheses, and not others?

              A better test of whether someone’s religious is this: do they try to convince you that atheism is a religion?

            • IceFoxX@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              I am an atheist but I believe in science and CERN would be my church.My belief goes with the Higgs boson aka God particle. I don’t talk others out of their beliefs as long as they don’t try to force their beliefs on me.

            • ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              I’m agnostic about other gods but my religion is not believing in the Abrahamic god as described in the bible.

        • lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Atheism is exactly that though. Theism is a belief in a higher power, atheism is the opposite. That’s what the “a” prefix indicates - an opposite.

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 minutes ago

            Atheism and agnosticism are two different things. Atheism is the rejection of a higher power, you believe there cannot be a higher power. Agnosticism is the acceptance of the unknown, you believe you don’t know if there is or isn’t be a higher power.

            In a hypothetical scenario where higher power does exist and that higher power does something that becomes evidence of the existence of a higher power. An atheist would reject such evidence because a higher power cannot exist and the evidence would be contradictory. An agnostic would not reject such evidence because an agnostic is not rejecting a higher power and as such the evidence would also not be contradictory.

            And in a reverse hypothetical, let’s say we discovered all the secrets of the universe and found evidence of higher powers not being able to exist. A theist would reject such evidence because a higher power must exist and the evidence would be contradictory. An agnostic would not reject the evidence because the evidence would not be contradictory.

            And I personally lean on the apathetic side of agnosticism. If there is a god (or gods) then there is a god (or gods), and if there isn’t then there isn’t. There’s no reason to mull over something that has had no bearing on my life and if tomorrow we get irrefutable evidence for either side that’s when I’ll deal with that new reality. In the mean time there are better things to do.

          • III@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            The reason these people can’t comprehend lack of belief is because they are stuck thinking god is a default state - that it requires belief to assert it isn’t real. When in fact the concept of god is no different than every other deity, Greek god, unicorn, space teapot… you name it. It is nothing more than a regionally popular unfalsifiable claim. They can’t wrap their minds around who the burden of proof falls on.

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    347
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Watching Linus take a big public dump on someone who deserves it is one of life’s finest guilty pleasures. It’s like a Maya Angelou poem. You can tell he really cared, and meant it, and took some time to get it right.

    • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      85
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Reading his words really slams home which side of the political spectrum truly believes in personal freedom and liberty. And it’s not the side that promotes fascism and wants to implement a Christian version of Sharia law under the Ten Commandments.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    10 hours ago

    To be fair what he’s described is at most Progressive. The left rejects the current economic model as a start. Workers owning the means of production instead of an owner class.

    • RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      There’s a whole lot of river to swim between fair and equal treatment and full fledged socialism. Not everyone on “the left” sleeps with Karl Marx under their pillow.

    • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      I don’t really know much about his personal politics, but his work seems to speak pretty loudly about rejecting the idea of software as private property to be bought and sold by capital, which, you know, that’s more than just progressive, even if it’s just in one area.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yup, my point is not that he isn’t an ally, it’s that being an ally isn’t inherently leftist.

        • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I have a hard time finding a right wing or centrist ideology that gives a shit about minorities. So, while correlation doesn’t always imply causation, it usually does.

          • phlegmy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 minutes ago

            I think the whole left vs right thing is stupid.
            Individual views are much more complex than a single left/right axis, so you’re always going to find people on both sides who have views that differ greatly from the major political party on their ‘side’.

            A ‘progressive’ right winger would care more about preventing the government from deciding what you’re allowed to do, rather than explicitly protecting minorities.
            So while they wouldn’t push laws that require businesses to serve everybody indiscriminately, they also wouldn’t push laws that explicitly ban things like gender therapy.

            Obviously the majority of right wingers in america aren’t progressive though.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    The Right doesn’t care what people actually believe.

    They happily quote MLK on a daily basis.

    Ray Bradbury was always anti-fascist, but he called out President Obama because there were no space missions during the Obama terms. After Bradbury died the Right tried to cherry pick quote to make him look like a life long Republican.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Bradbury needed to look closer then because Obama was working on NASA to get it built back up. Trump didn’t magically make rockets available in a couple years. That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.

        Yet somehow, people still think Mr. “We’ll be on Mars by 2025,” who is still launching rockets that explode mid-air, should be allowed to throw out this tried and true method. Surely, the idea of “move fast and break things” is more financially responsible than polluting debris and waste over the country. Fucking monorail salesman…

        • spacesatan@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 minutes ago

          Did you never hear about falcon 9 or something? SpaceX’s design process is tried and true. They used it to design the most successful rocket platform ever made. Not only is first stage reuse a massive breakthrough in it’s own right but they pulled it off with arguably the most reliable rocket in history,

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 hours ago

          SpaceX was an accomplishment that got a lot done. Elon might be shit, but he hasn’t destroyed everything he’s touched.

          I think he’s always been a sociopathic narcissist. However. It was around the time of the “pedo” comment or early Covid that he completely purged anyone who would tell him no, surrounded himself with yes-men, and fried his brain with drugs.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      per Bradbury’s Wikipedia Article

      "Bradbury considered himself a political independent.[83] Raised a Democrat, he voted for the Democratic Party until 1968. In 1952, he took out an advertisement in Variety as an open letter to Republicans, stating: “Every attempt that you make to identify the Democratic Party as the party of Communism, as the ‘left-wing’ or ‘subversive’ party, I will attack with all my heart and soul.”[84] However, Lyndon B. Johnson’s handling of the Vietnam War left Bradbury disenchanted, and from 1968 on he voted for the Republican Party in every presidential election with the exception of 1976, when he voted for Jimmy Carter. According to Bradbury’s biographer Sam Weller, Carter’s inept handling of the economy “pushed [Bradbury] permanently away from the Democrats”.[83]

      Bradbury called Ronald Reagan “the greatest president” whereas he dismissed Bill Clinton, calling him a “shithead”.[85] In August 2001, shortly before the September 11 attacks, he described George W. Bush as “wonderful” and stated that the American education system was a “monstrosity”.[86] He later criticized Barack Obama for ending NASA’s crewed space flight program.[85]

      In 2010, he criticized big government, saying that there was “too much government” in America, and “I don’t believe in government. I hate politics. I’m against it. And I hope that sometimes this fall, we can destroy part of our government, and next year destroy even more of it. The less government, the happier I will be".[85] Bradbury was against affirmative action, condemned what he called “all this political correctness that’s rampant on campuses”, and called for a ban of quotas in higher education.[21][85] He asserted that “[e]ducation is purely an issue of learning—we can no longer afford to have it polluted by damn politics”.[21]”

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yeah that’s uh… that sounds about right. I wonder a lot about that generation.

        Would Rod Serling, a humanist at heart, who campaigned to bring black actors onto mainstream TV sets, and always sent a message that the individual should always fight against an oppressive regime… would he too be lost in a sea of republicanism as he got older and the world changed around him?

        I’m glad we’ll never know.

  • rickdg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    12 hours ago

    In Europe, Linus is probably right of centre. Just let anyone do whatever except walk around with a gazillion firearms because that’s just insane.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      174
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      nah even in Europe being trans friendly makes you at least left leaning

      we’re not many miles ahead in the societal run towards progress and acceptance, the US is just sprinting the wrong way

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        8 hours ago

        You don’t even have to be trans friendly. He never said he was friendly. You can just not care about what other people do with their lives.

      • Klear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        11 hours ago

        In Europe being trans friendly has fuck-all to do with your political leanings on the left-right axis. It’s just USA warping the political discourse with their literally one-dimensional politics.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        LGBT has always been a target.

        The “good guys” still (chemically) castrated one of their greatest minds that won the war for ten, just because he happened to like dicks.

        Theres a reason people wanted to reduce the victims of the Holocaust to just being Jewish and ignored all the other groups that both sides wanted to persacute.

        They did the same thing this time, target LGBT to build the movement and are now expanded to other groups.

        Hopefully everyone stands up while we still have the numbers, otherwise they’ll keep chipping away fringe groups.

      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Nah it really depends.

        While the right tends to be religious and does not really approve anything LGBTQ-related, they’ve learned to behave and to mind their own business, which is actually fine. Respect other people, even if you don’t agree with them and as long as nobody’s getting hurt, we can all live happy lives.

        This new wave of “America-style” extreme right lunatics though, that’s a different story. Those entitled fuckers feel they’re allowed to mess with other people’s lives, and they’re due a harsh lesson in civility.

      • rickdg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        What the Americans call libertarians have some minority representation in Europe and they’re tolerant of minorities. Not as good as leftists but better than conservatives.

      • samus12345@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        It’s pretty hard to make an accurate blanket statement about what the US believes any more. There really are two very different Americas, and the evil one is in power.

          • samus12345@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            Most of America IS working class, so that’s not true. Neither political party represents the people well, that’s certainly true, although one does so even worse than the other.

          • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            True if we’re talking about the divide in the uniparty, though id say the real divide in America is between the wealthy/ruling class (and the sycophants they use their wealth to indoctrinate), and the working class.