On software communities, "Rock star" programmers, and... Linus

This is a low-quality essay that is not worth discussing directly. (Meta-note: see, it's possible to have firm opinions without being abusive).<p>I just want to add that there are plenty of outstanding engineers with very high standards who lead projects without going on the kinds of abusive rants that Linus is known for. For example: Roberto Ierusalimschy (Lua), Matz (Ruby), Ian Lance Taylor (Binutils, GCC, Gold linker), Shawn Hargreaves (Allegro, works at Microsoft now), Jeff Dean &#38; Sanjay Ghemawat (two of Google's most senior engineers), just to name a few.<p>These guys don't compromise their opinions or let crap into the code-base just to be nice. But they're all really nice guys who don't rip into people for being wrong. When you see messages from them on a mailing list, you get a warm feeling because you know they are going to be insightful, accurate, terse, helpful, and friendly.<p>Some people like the machismo that comes from people like Linus. It's like watching superhero movies and rooting for the guy who kicks ass against the bad guys. But I think ultimately this is not a healthy way to lead a community. If you speak in a way that triggers people's defense mechanisms, you make it harder to rationally evaluate the issues. If you ridicule people for their opinions, you aren't giving them an out that lets them change their mind later; a person is inclined to dig their heels in rather than look foolish.

This has nothing to do with Linus... feel free to ignore.<p>A few years ago, oh hell looks like more than a decade ago, I was working with a brand new project manager. This guy was pretty fresh, saw the world "manager" and got all glossy eye'd. He walked around the office "cracking the whip" and liked to make statements such as "I'm not here to make friends" and "I'm here to get these projects done".<p>Do you think, if this was ProjectManagerNews instead of HackerNews this person would be idolized? Would be held in high regard? Would other ProjectManagers stick up for him? What if he led a successful project or two? Would that validate his decision to act that way?<p>...more importantly: Would you want to work for him? Is success a solid defense on being an asshole?<p>I'm perfectly happy to sit down and discuss a problem but I've got not time for assholes, tempers, or rockstars for that matter.

This is a false dichotomy. It is possible to have an opinion and not be an asshole. It just takes more work to do so.<p>The real argument should be "I'm glad &#60;insert name here&#62; is a jerk because it allows him to spend more time doing &#60;insert cool thing here&#62;."<p>Personally, I think the extra work is worth it, but I'm also not the hub of a project like Linux, a movement like the FSF, or a company like Apple.<p>Above and beyond everything else, the most interesting question is: Can you get into the hub position without being a prick?

I just think the arguments fall on two spectrums.<p>On one end is that Linus is God and that he's untouchable. On the other end is that Linus is a asshole that tells everyone off.<p>The more reasonable middle being that Linus is a pretty smart guy with an incredibly history of accomplishment. He's should be respected and his way of conversing with people is particular to personality. Like, we deal with people with personalities all the time. I don't think Linus has ever, despite all his cursing, personally attacked anyone. He just attacks stupid ideas. I find his comments refreshing. You just need to give him some trust to understand why he is saying whatever he is saying.<p>I don't think that also implies that people should be unwelcoming or that people should have new ideas/opinions on what should be what. I think that Linus isn't some selfish jerk who doesn't want people to get involved with Linux. I think he just has reasonable expectations and isn't afraid to call you on your shit.<p>Cool post though.

What frustrates me is you young bucks confusing Linus' personality with his technical prowess. He is not (only) his code.<p>What if you found out Mozart ate little babies. Some of you would say that his music sucks. Some of you would say "Well, Mozart had to eat babies, to fuel his creative genius!" Few would accept that Mozart was a flipping musical genius who ate babies.<p>From what I've read online, Linus can be a churlish little bitch, obviously ignoring the issue at hand when it suits him. Sometimes, he calls someone a moron, because they have done something he doesn't like, for some social reason.<p>But he's a damn fine programmer, and can logic it up with the best of 'em. Often, when you get the the moron blessing from Linus, you have made a grave technical error, and you should be called on it. I wouldn't use the same style as Linus, but ey, to each his own.<p>Just enjoy him for what he is, and leave the cult of personality stuff for others.

One of the reasons why it happens is because it's all too easy for someone to "make their bones" by criticizing someone famous. If you're a blogger, and you're trying to get attention (or trying to get karma points on Hacker News :-), what better way than to slam someone like Linus Torvalds by saying, "Shame, shame! You <i>should</i> suffer fools, and it's bad form to call people who are idiots for what they are."

A non-trivial percentage of "rock star" software engineers are not capable of behaving themselves. The causes are varied. Some have been so busy getting A's and working upwards that they never formed lateral bonds with their peers. Some have something clinically wrong them. Some have been told they're right so much that they don't know how to behave when they're wrong. Some tie so much of their self worth to the problem they're solving that disagreement becomes a personal insult.<p>Whatever the reason, the software industry repeatedly explains away debilitating personality flaws as a cute quirk or even a benefit. It reminds me of D1 football coaches defending players who behave like animals off the field.<p>There is almost never an acceptable reason for being an asshole. It may be worth it to hire an asshole but that does not absolve that person of being an asshole. It just makes them a smart asshole.

Why is it that nobody notices the selection bias? Linus sends hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails every week. Does it really surprise anyone that we've been able to find fully <i>four</i> instances in the <i>past six months</i> in which he sounded somewhat angry? Is there anyone here who can claim a pristine post history?<p>This certainly applies to RMS as well.

I can't imagine managing an open-source project as big as Linux. Therefore, I cannot judge Linus' way of voicing out his mind.<p>But if there is one advantage I see from the way he does it is that it drives careless and willfully ignorant people away from his project.<p>In my personal opinion, I think people are quickly judging Linus' personality based on some texts they see on their computer screen alone.

I agree with these points. It's completely fair for them to have a strong opinion, and express that opinion. I've not felt that any of the stuff I've read from Linus has ever been disrespectful, and they are all well formed and written to top it off. Just because they are not the welcome wagon, does not make them terrible people.

&#62; <i>"One of the arguments which gets dragged out every time is that they are role models, and as such should be doing their very best to create a welcoming environment for everyone... Bullshit"</i><p>+1<p>So called "rock star" developers, particularly the really prolific ones, are busy <i>getting s#!t done</i>. Linux has no shortage off helpful community members who are not otherwise primarily charged with governance of (possibly) the most important open source software ever made.

The popularity of those controversial comments seems to generate a lot of insightful discussion; whatever the merits of the original comments, I enjoy reading debates on Hacker News about C++ or GitHub pull requests.

It's pretty easy to not be called an idiot by people like Linus: Don't be an idiot. It's strange that so many people can't manage to do that, and take offense when someone points it out.

It isn't a matter of having strong, dissenting, controversial, or unpopular opinions. It's a matter of not having tact.

My favorite example on topic <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEl4QfcAK2o</a><p>Arguing rethorics is a fallacy - if you can't prove someone wrong, you raise political correctness issues.

I find it best to just stick to reading people's code and their documentation (if any) as opposed to reading what comments they make about computers, software, or any other subject.<p>This is because the more I learn about them as people the more likely I am to be disappointed. They will say something stupid. Or, e.g., I find out they like some OS, application or language that I just cannot stand. And I'm like WTF? In short, they are just very different people. I may never meet them in person. It's probably better that I don't. The code I am using as a model might have actually been written a dog, posing as a person, like the one in the NewYorker cartoon. Who knows?<p>Trying to view these authors as "models" (versus seeing only their _code_ as a model) is just setting yourself up for disappoinment.<p>That said, some of my all time favorite "coder prose" is the netcat source. Let's face it, programming can be very frustrating. And you need a sense of humor. I wish he was still actively writing and releasing software. And that program still compiles as smooth as any, 15 years later. Great stuff.

Bullshit right back. I don't pay attention to the others, but Torvalds is awful. His bizarro personal attack on C++ programmers when explaining why C++ isn't used in the kernel was wildly unnecessary. There are sufficient technical reasons alone. I watched his talk on git where he repeatedly said SVN sucked in order to make the case for git, but he <i>never gave any example of why SVN sucks</i>. In other words, the only people to benefit from his comments were git users who already shared his hate for SVN.<p>I like Linux. I cannot stand Linus, and I'll avoid him at every chance. He relishes in being awful to people and, regardless of his technical contribution, he seems like a terrible person.