104
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
104 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
48332 readers
396 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't really see how that relates. These are open source contributors to Linux, a global os everyone has access to. Their contributions would benefit everyone. If their employed by a Russian company paying them to contribute to Linux then the economic aspect might make sense but I see that as a pretty weak argument. Now those devs are more likely to be poached to work in industries that more directly contribute to the war. This is like ww1 and German scientists who were supposed to be impartial getting recruited into the war machine to create poison gas. We shouldn't be encouraging that or making it easier.
Most of these developers do work for companies that are paying them to make contributions so, it stands to reason that the kernel additions or changes are of particular use to those companies. Nothing is stopping them from continuing to make changes on their own fork for their own benefit, but that means drifting away from the mainline kernel. That adds extra work and overhead, which is the point.
I've seen nothing to suggest this has been identified as a concern, but modern warfare systems do often run on Linux. Some of these developers might already be contributing directly to the war. Also, economics are just as much a part of warfare as bullets and bombs. In this case particularly, economic factors are almost certainly going to be critical to ending the conflict.
I still maintain this is a pretty weak argument. And it does nothing to address the question of what do these devs contribute to instead because it's not likely their suddenly gonna become jobless and dependent on the state. These are highly skilled and motivated developers just based on what ive heard about getting contributions into the mainline kernel. I just hope they don't get recruited to write drone targetting systems because we've decided to ban them from contributing to a project everyone benefits from.
I'm not going to take that hill because the generals haven't proven to me that it's necessary to win the war.
This isn't an isolated thing. It's a small part of the biggest sanctions effort in history. Every single sanction, can be nit-picked in just the same way. There is very little in the way of technology that can't be dual purposed into warfare, and those that can't be are still relevant to the economic pressures being applied.
I have no idea why you are so sure that the development in question isn't already connected to military drones, but it's a really weird assumption. What exactly do you think is the number one priority for Russia right now in the area of technical development? What operating system do you think powers most drones, military or otherwise?
I can no longer sit back and allow Russian infiltration, Russian indoctrination, Russian subversion, and the international Russian conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
You left out "Russian invasion, Russian ethnic cleansing, and Russian war crimes."
This is absurd. Are you being serious? I'm aware how sanctions are setup in the US because I'm compelled to complete hr training on them every 8 months even though I have no interaction with anyone that would overlap with sanctions requirements. That doesn't make it any less absurd. It's also not on me to somehow categorically disprove the link between Linux contributions and military work, the onus there is and as it always should be is on the entity demanding you do something in response to it. But OK, let's say all the work on Linux coming from anyone who happens to live in or have a Russian nationality somehow goes back to the war effort. Ban work on Russian firmware or Linux compatibility with Russian hardware. Don't ban Russian people unilaterally and with force using flimsy hypothetical justifications and reductive arguments. I go back to ww1 and the role of scientists in war. They should abstain. Developers should abstains. We don't belong to the countries we live in, our work should exist for all mankind and to the betterment of society as a whole. If the US wants a trade embargo, or a corporate berlin wall I'm all for it. This is not that.
Edit: Also, not really relevent, but I would be absolutely amazed if the Russian government is somehow on the bleeding edge of linux development and actively deploying head branch builds of linux with the latest available firmware. Most of the US government still runs on windows out of sheer apathy. If they are using these contributions in drones their almost certainly backporting to a stable linux release and that means this kinda ban if it follows you're reason isn't going to have an impact until a few releases down the line and that's easily bypassable by just not upgrading linux. Russian already presumably sanctioned to older hardware (excluding self manufactured) so that isn't even a hard choice.
So, in your world, the US government is responsible to provide you with a detailed justification for the specific sanctions being applied against a foreign adversary? Keep waiting.
I really don't think you understand what's going on in the Russian economy right now. Russia has unwittingly gotten themselves embroiled in an existential conflict. (Less existential for the country than for the warlords running it.) Every expenditure or resources, natural, human, financial, etc, is being weighed against it's benefits to the war. Even basic things like their ability to feed their population are only valued because the war can't be fought without them. That's what a war economy is.
Despite all the failures of the Russian military, it took well over a year for Putin to fire his top general. The reason it took so long was that Putin trusted his general to remain loyal and not initiate a coup. Removing him was a drastic move, but the more interesting part is who replaced him. The new Russian defense minister got the job with absolutely no military training, background, or experience. His only qualification was that he is an extremely capable economist who is largely credited with helping Russia transition to a war economy and blunt the impact of western sanctions. That should tell you all you need to know about how important Russia thinks economics are to the war.
That's nice and all, but totally unrealistic. The vast majority of kernel development is done because the developers (or their sponsors) benefit from the work they do and from having that work integrated with the rest of the kernel. I don't see that as a bad thing.
There is no such thing as "Russian hardware" when it comes to computing. Russia has it's own standards for a lot of technologies, but creating a proprietary set of computing standards that's disconnected from the ecosystem of western hardware makes no sense. They manufacture some of their own computing hardware, but it's all based on the same standards that are used everywhere else.
Why? Anyone contributing to the Linux kernel is, almost by definition, at the "bleeding edge of Linux development". It may not be the bleeding edge pushing the boundaries of computer science, but it doesn't have to be. A whole lot of kernel development is pretty basic stuff aimed to satisfy particular needs or requirements. Drones benefit greatly from highly specialized power management, real time data collection, flexible networking, etc. Most are built from off the shelf hardware and consumer electronics.
The issue of drift exists with both older and newer kernels. If a particular kernel is so stable that drift isn't an issue, then it isn't a kernel that will be adding a bunch of new Russian commits anyways. If they are simply back-porting it themselves, then their inability to commit to the main Linux branches is irrelevant. In the scenario, the whole discussion is moot.