@hipsterelectron do u think linus knows that most kernel mantainers are being paid to get backdoors in there or is he just blissfully unaware
7
Replies
0
Boosts
@fiore linus signed off on the (VERY OBVIOUS) backdoor in ML-DSA module signature verification back in march. while david howells (the red hat guy who did it) was obfuscating the changes made to his linux-fs branch from the general public by swamping the crypto/ changes in massive LLM-addled bullshit in the ceph filesystem, linus reviewed the change individually, and accepted it into his tree, while retaining the backdating that howells applied to foil git log traversal by date.
@fiore
every single thing linus accepts into his tree goes through the review board system at kernel dot org e.g. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=b6ee92d7f7f0498d1f776d0b125a2f6bcedf0891 there were stamps of approval from the entire linux crypto team collectively on the whole series of backdoors in crypto/ that went in during the 7.0 rc cycle (no individuals signed off on the changes except david howells, it was just a stamp of approval applied collectively which implicated the entire system in an instant)
@fiore so yes, i believe linus is in fact the top dog fuckboy extraordinaire and literally more dangerous than bill gates because he's incredibly effective at PR. the linux foundation is not laundering money to him from google and microsoft for no reason--he has clearly been an asset of the US security state for many years. i don't know or really care whether he started out that way--but i will note that the amoeba OS by andrew s tannenbaum is one of the two actually interesting operating systems ever made, and it was made during the 90s, when he was famously telling linus how monolithic kernels are an incoherent design methodology, after he expatriated from the US to the netherlands (somewhat the reverse of linus)
@hipsterelectron so basically when he dies itll just be the same but worse
like a free for all backdoor party
@fiore i think stallman was much closer to linus than either of them would like to believe and in fact i would be curious how much linus himself served to buttress the free software movement as a controlled opposition to the capitalism+fascism exercised by US intelligence agencies. particularly after learning from @astraleureka recently about the technological significance of tivo being a linux box that was also an incredibly popular product (and also the thing that directly spawned the GPLv3 after it failed to uphold copyleft provisions, causing stallman to repeat the phrase "tivoization" ad nauseum), i hadn't realized how much that in itself was not just a side note in the history of free software but in fact was also a huge impetus that led to linux becoming massive and overpowering every other unix-alike
@fiore i'm still confused as to why stallman accepted making coreutils, glibc, and gcc as the build and packaging system for linux instead of devoting any time at all on the hurd kernel. if stallman was such an MIT fuckboy he should have been all over making an operating system. instead he argued endlessly with gcc developers not to make a plugin system because uhhhhh his best buddy larry lessig said it would weaken copyleft!!!!
@fiore i get so pissed off about this page now https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html because it has the fundamentally best prompt fucking ever
Proprietary software developers have the advantage of money; free software developers need to make advantages for each other.
huey p newton (who took courses for years at uc hastings law school) took this kind of comparison and then developed the black panther party out of it by leveraging the asymmetric advantages of legalized hipocrisy again and again in endlessly creative ways--the free breakfast program in particular was not just a genius move but one that they knew would never be matched by white supremacists.
that's an advantage you have by really thinking in opposition to your adversaries
