Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by criddell 3 days ago
> It argues that maintainers should consider political/moral/ethical arguments around climate change, effect on water supplies, energy prices, etc

Is the assumption that maintainers did not consider those things?

1 comments

Imho, this is the crux of the debate.

Of course Linus realizes linux development is political, because he's lived that, however he might phrase it.

What I think both are actually saying:

Drew Devault (blogger): Linux development should place political/moral/ethical arguments in primacy (or at least more important?)

Linus: Technical reality should always come first, with other considerations secondary

If the above read is correct, I'm sympathetic to Linus' position. If the linux kernel doesn't work and improve, technically, then nothing else about the project matters.

Bikeshedding about political/moral/ethical qualms impairs the technical work.

Ergo, a strong lighthouse statement from Linus that the technical work always comes first, even if other considerations are made when appropriate.

The AI genie (referring broadly to 'any LLM-based tool that performs a useful development function') isn't going back in the bottle, and linux sticking its head in the sand for ethical reasons will harm linux.

One could place political/moral/ethical arguments in primacy and still conclude that the greater good is best served by continuing on.