Just as people nowadays exclaim "Stallman was right", I suspect that in the future there will be a similar sense that "Barry was right", particularly once Linux users find themselves legally mandated to run some kind of "systemd-gatekeeperd" to check that they aren't executing any binaries whose hashes (or developer signatures) appear on a government-maintained blacklist.<p>(I know that technically this functionality could be implemented without systemd, so a government could pass a "Gatekeeper"[0] law regardless of whether systemd existed, but the way it integrates with the boot process, especially so-called "Secure Boot", and the kernel, and controls process permissions, means that 90% of Linux users are just one unwanted software update away from complying with this law. That in turn makes it much harder to oppose such a law being introduced).<p>[0] <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-from-mac-computers-amid-privacy-concerns" rel="nofollow">https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-explains-why-it-grabs-data-...</a>
title should say 2014.<p>Wow! that is an absolutely EPIC rant. cannot believe I hadn't seen this until now. I'm not sure I agree with everything Barry said, but it does push a lot of buttons that ring true for me.<p>And since 2014, systemd gained skills to control everything from home directories to secure boot, containers, privilege escalation, and (apparently) mind control, time, dns, and temporary files. It also automatically re-installs pulseaudio and reports you directly to the council of Lennart if you "accidentally" delete or turn any of it off out of frustration.<p>I also never knew Poettering was behind (er. responsible for) avahi discovery. I must remember to properly thank him for this someday.<p>So yes, given the benefit of six(edit) *eight years of hindsight, I think we all should've listen a bit more to Barry and perhaps slowed down and found some simplistic-er options.