I know this has been touched on on other threads related to Linux's political takeover. But I get a sense that this possibility has been too cynically dismissed so far.
Let's make a thread on what it would take to . fork the Kernel, . keep it up to date with upstream, . inspect new commits for cancer and skip them / fix them, . host the project safely (so that it won't be taken down by the usual suspects), . build a reputation for this project being the true legitimate continuation of The Linux Meritocratic Project, . make it easy to manually compile / package / install on any GNU/Linux distribution, . serve -reproducible- binaries for all distributions, . make it politically unsubvertible.
I think that's a decent start.
Some incentives to do this:
. There's probably a lot of Linux contributors looking for a way out. As long as we keep this fork shitpost-free and focused on meritocracy, it seems to me that quite a few should be glad to jump the shark. This could lead to this project not only having all the updates from upstream but also a few more.
. If this takes off, it would lead to these people looking at ways of preventing us from using upstream code. The reaction from the community to that would be even bigger than it ever could be to a perverse yet nice-sounding CoC.
. If the GPLv2 thing of contributors being able to withdraw their permission to use their code proves legally workable, an explicitly merit-focused fork would be safe from that. All sorts of actors that rely on the Linux Kernel as it exists today, could see no option but to move to this fork.
I'm not versed enough in these topics to do it myself. I'm just some guy that thinks more or less orderly and is under the impression that we're missing an opportunity here.
Also, by the looks of it no one person can possibly do this. Which is why I'm trying to figure out what would be needed.
My guess is that while no one person could do this alone, it wouldn't require many more than a few to get this off the ground and up to date.
Can we figure out the list of skills / roles required?
Make your case by making a list of the responsibilities a bunch of us couldn't possibly cover. Or STFU.
Another interesting consideration would be making contributions optionally anonymous. So former Linux devs could move over to this project even if it gets bad press. And it would give the project an edge of political persecution. A legitimate one.
Ok. So that's the general idea. What do you think?
At this point, I'm gonna stay put and see what happens next. As far as I know, Linus may wind up rescinding the CoC right after I switch over to OpenBSD. That or amend it to keep contributors from pulling their code out of the kernel.
A few dozen talented full-time kernel developers or a few hundred talented voluntarian kernel developers. Note that talented kernel developers are six-figure expensive, not just in silicon valley but anywhere in the world. Costs a lot of $$$ $$$$ $$$
I don't think so. What makes you think that?
Skills: - Excellent knowledge of C - Good knowledge of driver development - Ability to read and understand other peope's code - Resistance to bullshittery Roles: - Driver development - Non-driver kernel development - Code review, QA, security checks - Running development infrastructure (easiest and least important part) - PR, advertising just kidding
Jeremiah James
Codes have to go through a peer reviewed process before they get approved anyways.
Cooper Morales
A few dozen talented full-time kernel developers or a few hundred talented voluntarian kernel developers. Note that talented kernel developers are six-figure expensive, not just in silicon valley but anywhere in the world.
How is all that necessary just to keep the repo up to date with upstream?
It would be nice to get a lot of progress done on this fork but we don't need that to begin with. As long as we keep it up to date, it should be good enough.
How? How do other open-source not-massively-funded projects build their reputations? I might be wrong, but I doubt Apache foundation, for example, is investing a lot on PR. Doesn't their reputation rest mostly on their projects working well?
Hosting fees will be low to begin with and pay themselves once there's enough people interested in keeping the project alive.
How? How would that take money? If the rules are clear from the start and aren't subject to these types of tactics, it sounds to me like it should be enough.
Read the comments on the CoC drama anywhere where there are open comments. No matter how left-leaning the platform is, most people are on our side what makes you thing autistic devs are going to be less on our side than the general public?
Bumping for interest. If I know these SJWs well enough the most they will do is change names and terms into something more "inclusive" to fit their agenda. Whatever these assholes do, I assume it wouldn't be too hard to revert. All it takes is someone to initiate a fork. I'd do it myself, however I'm running on very low-end hardware that can't work with big files. I'd be very happy to contribute in any way I can nonetheless. Right now, forking the project seems like the best idea so far. I encourage anons to start learning C and kernel development if they haven't already. Most of us are NEET basement dwelling neckbeards with a lot of free time so why not try to make this a thing? Being a lazy piece of shit isn't an excuse.
This is a good thread but I'm pretty sure the real contributors are going to do something similar soon... r-r-right???
Grayson Cooper
Having a desktop focused fork would be nice. It shouldn't take too long to learn about general architecture of the kernel to learn what can be removed (starting with CoC, then other bullshit that has no use on desktop like Hyper-V clipboard support...). Then after code has been removed we build custom pottering-free distribution and we have a perfect system. Somebody should create a logo and a name.
Blake Ramirez
I propose we try to put our fork on as many repositories as we can so that people have a choice just like when picking between linux, linux-lts, linux-libre, etc. As for creating a fork designed for desktops; I can see the appeal but what about users who use Linux on their servers? Why'd we leave them to get assraped by the SJWs? And creating two different forks and maintaining them wouldn't be optimal. The most we're doing here is sharing around ideas, so I imagine maintaining two forks would be hell.
Ian Morris
Hey, hey, hey, you're not "just some guy!" You're an Idea Guy™, and we never have enough of those.
I'd love to help. In fact, I'LL MAKE THE NEW LOGO
Austin Cooper
LKML has been remarkably silent on this topic. To me it seems like most actual kernel devs either don't care or can't speak up due to pressure from their employers. Either way they won't support a fork.
Don't forget you're fighting a massive propaganda machine backed by jew money. Coraline won't be happy about your fork.
Hosting is cheap as fuck, but getting linux to build reproducibly in the first place sounds like quite an amount of work. I don't know, maybe it already does.
Just keeping up to date requires no people at all. A cronjob can do that. But we want to find and keep out bullshit and add code by contributors who are banned from the main project, don't we? So we have to review the code that gets added to the kernel. If we assume almost all of the code that gets accepted into the kernel is good, we can do with a few dozen voluntarian talented kernel devs, but good luck finding them.
Easton Fisher
Derailment: The Post
It's also not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is to keep Linux as it is and offer a non-compromised alternative that keeps merit at the center of things.
Fuck off, irony fag. This thread is proving so far that there aren't good arguments against us doing this. Despite what it would look like when reading the other threads.
Christian Scott
Not the user you were talking to, but: What's that failure of nature gonna do about it? Throw a temper tantrum on Twitter? The only people who will take it seriously are the same people we're trying to isolate from the project. As for reviewing the code, finding politically related changes isn't gonna be difficult, however because now you can't disagree or say no to someone's shit code or else you're a nazi, there's likely going to be code that will cause issues, or cause a performance drop. This is pretty much the only thing maintainers of this fork would have to actively look for.
Jackson Morris
She wouldn't have gotten as far without active support from major tech companies. I'm trying to say that she (or any woman, let alone blue haired ones) is not the driving force behind the CoCs.
Jason Reed
Oh so it looks like I found the designated stormweenie thread.
I too hate women and minorities, do I fit in yet? heh
Justin Lewis
Of course any desktop kernel would be more than capable of running server software, I'm talking about removing stuff like BPF memsql.com/blog/bpf-linux-performance/for which you probably have no use of, unless you're some large company with massive datacenters (notice /* Copyright (c) 2018 Facebook */ in source) in which case you are most likely already pozzed. Unsurprisingly exploits for this exist exploit-db.com/exploits/45058/
Careful. Your reddit is showing.
Hunter Martin
These kinds of features should be optional but still in the source and you should be able to add flags that ignore those parts during compilation.
Oliver James
I'd like to keep seccomp-bpf.
my bad
Thomas Green
Have a code of conduct that just says "No discussion allowed except directly pertaining to the project. No politics of any kind".
Julian Cox
Careful. Your fascism is showing.
Robert Smith
The problem/danger with raiding 8ch is you get exposed to the views and arguments of the posters.
You may very well find that one day you will come back, but this time you agree with many of the posters. I am speaking from experience.
Jeremiah Cook
The main problem is that the sort of autists that work on Linux are too easily bullied by women, even "women" (trannies) still have power over them. It's like that pic of the tech company where 7/8 women do shit like work on inclusiveness, diversity, anti-bullying etc and the one guy just writes code.
Andrew Edwards
Again. Most people are on our side. Devs are more autistic than most people.
Those who don't speak because of pressure from their employers would probably be very inclined to contribute anonymously to a fork. You'd be surprise how much people dislike not being able to express their opinions.
And yet bad press can only hurt you so much in a time when the press itself is seen as a bad actor. There's little they can do if you stand by your positions. Most people are broken down by gaslighting tactics. Most of us see through that.
Everyone on this thread seems so invested in making this idea seem unfeasible, but with such flimsy arguments.
I assumed making them reproducible would be simple enough. It's not the main point, though. The main point is being able to distribute it for easy consumption.
Then let's start with that. At worst we're going to have a kernel that's just as bad as Linux. We can figure how to build on top of that progressively.
This can be done in incremental steps as more people join the project. In the meantime we could probably rely on long testing periods to make sure bugs aren't merged into releases, can't we?
Jonathan Perez
This is why my pet theory (teach Chads how to code) is the only way to save us.
Its in the drivers you git, Intel driver code is completely closed off in a propriety format. Forking OS code doesn't matter any more, they're in the hardware.
Oliver Hill
My brain is full of fuck
Luke Sullivan
left wing authoritarianism == morally good right wing authoritarianism == morally bad
Noah Smith
...
Isaiah Bailey
If I was MikeeUSA/Gregory Smith, I'd kill myself, Logan.
How do you plan to achieve these goals especially this one:
Logan Nguyen
That's the point of this thread. To discuss that.
Having a strict "no personal stuff" or "your feelings don't matter" is one possibility.
Evan Martinez
Doesn't Stallman support GNU/Linux libre? Wouldn't rms reject CoCk because its not free-as-in-freedom? Then again maybe he wants linux to crash and burn so he can try and snag up some devs to push Turd
Joseph Campbell
RMS rejects the CoC and there for a whole shit ton of the FsF does. Theres a good chance they won't adopt the CoC simply because RMS is behind it.
Anthony Diaz
So RMS is next on the list. ESR will probably get in a fatal car accident in the next month as well. gg no re
Camden Walker
Doesn't GNOME already have safe spaces for women. I can't find it now, but I remember seeing that in 2015.
Jaxon Gomez
Have a code of conduct, that says "The only allowed discussion is about things that directly relate to the project. Any and everything else is not allowed."
Josiah Jenkins
But user, the problematic use of the terms "slave" and "master" is directly related to this project.
Jace Cook
USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST
Leo Edwards
As you said: C developers are well paid and with plenty of available work, you won't easily find people that can and want to help. Average anons here don't have the required skills, you can't stack multiple meh programmers to make a good programmer.
If the entirety of the fork was changing a handful of license files, that could be done, but the moment anything technical starts to change you'll have trouble: there will be at least a few poeple calling the change pozzed/bloated/backdoored and then you get scope creep up to 11.
Ethan Hughes
You know what would be funny? if Linus came back in like a month and forked the Linux kernel himself, then convinced all the main contributors to switch to his fork.
Mason Nguyen
This, if someone actually starts it please do keep it shitpost-free, even if that means redditors will join in, help should be welcomed.
Hey I know most of us are LARPers/webdevs/nodevs, but I also know we have some actual smart and old people here, I think we'd have a better chance than /g/.
Nicholas Mitchell
L-linus?, what if they blackmail you again?
Jeremiah Ross
Cast the first git hidden service. We are waiting.
I would like to think that I'd take the initiative if I wasn't some spic living in Zimbabwe 2 that might get shot tomorrow.
Carter Mitchell
...
Justin Perez
Why are we forking and not them?
Jayden Rogers
And yet a lot work for free on open source projects. They not only have enough professional motivation to work on this project but political motivation too. To counter these infiltrators destroying their communities.
The key part of that being "average"
That's only partially true. With enough time and testing you do end up reaching essentially the same code.
I guess the part where the experts are irreplaceable is in decision-making. But I still haven't seen anyone make a compelling case for why getting professional devs to join would be impossible.
Can you make your best case for it?
That's the starting point. And that should get the project going for a while. I doubt they're going to insert Microsoft binary blobs or Pocket integration into the kernel right away. That should give us time to build something.
I'm well aware. That's what I'm trying to figure out. How to get people to join, and how to manage things to avoid these pitfalls.
What do you think would be needed? How many experts / benevolent dictators or, hierarchical structures, or written-in-stone principles would be necessary to prevent the ship from drifting away?
Brayden Lewis
delet
Jordan Allen
...
Gavin Brown
I'd just like to interject for a moment. "Fork" is problematic terminology that goes against the CoC, because forks are dangerous and potentially triggering. Same with "branch". Please use "spoon" and "river" from now on.
Caleb Price
You have a better cover than Finish American Linus.
John Lewis
That is, until RMS is dealt with and Matthew Garrett takes over, and we all know how that will go over.
Parker Myers
Or get a gym membership and BECOME THE CHAD
Charles Hall
Or we could skip most of those steps and just start contributing to a *BSD (that isn't FreeBSD) so they're able to grow a bigger userbase and usurp Linux's place. They already have a compiling kernel, they already have a reputation, and they already have a contributor-base.
Solution: Work on sex bots and artificial wombs so female 1.0 can finally be depreciated after the "feminism" bug has proved resistant to fixes.
Aiden Ramirez
Feminism is a (((backdoor)))
Landon Rodriguez
Because they want to. The broader the appeal of your project, the more you attract. Are you hoping for Linux devs to switch over to the fork? It's not likely to happen, whatever social game is used to keep them working on the main fork will be used to keep them off your fork. Zig Forums is not a big site, not enough anons to find a sufficient number significantly above average. There is not enough time, because you must keep up with the main branch. Also I doubt tests and time alone can fix lack of coding skills, less readable code can still do the same thing when ran. It's very hard and unlikely, not impossible. You need to find someone willing to spend time on mostly menial work, on an unpopular project, with the media painting anyone involved as a bad goy, all to keep up with a more popular project. Isn't removing the CoC a single change to a single file? If changing distro name and such takes a significant time, the project is doomed from the start. Divine intervention. Any governance system tried has failed, and I can't see a realistic way out.
If the next jump to another OS, I hope it's not a fork.. or even GPL. Sounds like a perfect time to give BSD it's rightful place. lol. But something gear towards everyone, not OpenBSD.
It's the sunset of an era and it just shows that GNU is the cuck license.
Xavier Hall
ITT Zig Forumsthetic retards think up "fork the kernel!" but sadly will amount to nothing because they are useless lazy faggots that would rather spend time "making arguments" for a new/forked/shooped kernal rather than actually writing a kernel. And thus nothing of consequence happens.
