this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
114 points (100.0% liked)
technology
23303 readers
17 users here now
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, banning maintainers who are russian means what in the long term? What were they contributing before?
It sets a precedent of banning maintainers and other contributors from nations in the Global South and nations declared enemies of NATO. This goes against open source philosophy, and this will lead to China and other nations needing to develop their own sovereign forks or kernels from scratch.
It's similar to the US working to ban RISC-V to stop China from using an open source instruction set to become more technologically sovereign. Restricting open source software from NATO's enemies is essentially NATO shooting themselves in the foot in the long term. NATO is sanctioning an enemy, so the enemy is incentivized to build alternatives to tech they lost (which can be forked easily), and then the alternatives become popular and challenge NATO's tech, which is not competing where over 30% of manufacturing industry exists, which leads to NATO's tech and industry crumbling as it cannot dominate the market like it was able to before and further accelerates the Empire's decline.
This is a good comment on this thread that explains the long term consequences more comprehensively than what I did: https://hexbear.net/comment/5541448
Thank you I'll check that out.
This is the list of contributors that got removed according to a popular russian Linux web community.
So they're no longer allowed to do what in regards to these systems? Do they not have access anymore to the things they built? Or is it that now there's a russian "branch" of these and a not russian "branch" that they both have access to?
I'm literally in IT and I don't know this shit lol, such a dummy
Apparently they have just been removed from the MAINTAINERS file for now but it is not yet known if this will have any implications for their ability to send patches for inclusion in the kernel. If the latter proves to be the case, some of the drivers might end up unmaintained until another person gains enough trust to become a maintainer. This will surely affect support for the Russian BAIKAL processors, for example.
Apparently the removed contributors can return only if they provide some sort of "documentation" (not specified which though). They can still work on the kernel, but now they are not able to directly merge changes into the codebase, they can only send patches which may or may not be accepted. Or they could organise and create an independent Linux kernel fork which they would have to keep up to date by merging code from the upstream.
This much I understood from the news and comments.