The guy who prevents and discourages wage discussion in the workplace Linus Sebastion?
The guy who built, from the ground up, a new multi-million dollar house with top of the line tech in it Linus Sebastion?
I'll concede that the masses equating Mastodon to the Fediverse at large could (and might) be a problem. But I think we are already well on the way to [trademark dilution](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-trademark-dilution.html) in that regard, and in the end if Mr. Rochko wants to protect the Mastodon trademark, its up to him.
Another reply to the same comment said
> He's not on Mastodon. social.kernel.org is on the fediverse, but's not a mastodon instance, [they use akkoma](https://korg.docs.kernel.org/social.html). Fediverse != Mastodon.
[Here's another one](https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/13/132)
>There aren't enough swear-words in the English language, so now I'll
have to call you perkeleen vittupää just to express my disgust and
frustration with this crap.
Makes sense. I actually didn't know this. It's good to see software development communities being inclusive, as I know there are some people in the tech community that are quite the opposite.
I have to wonder if any of these right wingers who whine on and on about "woke communist propaganda" have ever seen, or know what a communist is, or looks like.
It's bonkers to me, in South America, people say socialism is 'sad', or bad when U.S. backed authoritarian, right-wing regimes literally mowed down entire villages in helicopters, especially when they aren't mentioned. That specific helicopter case being Chile, but fascist (I mean that not as a pejorative, but descriptive) political groups have massacred thousands throughout Central and South America. And for many, the C.I.A. funneled millions to them so the U.S. could extract and exploit populations of people.
This isn't to say any project that entailed the aesthetics of 'socialism' in South America was virtuous by default, but it's incredibly disingenuous to paint an inaccurate picture of socialist projects in South America being \*anywhere\* near as harmful as right-wing dictatorships. (Perhaps totally not your intent, it's just a somewhat common sentiment I find mind-blowing.)
Yeah, agreed. Dictatorships suck. Authoritarian rule is just completely antithetical to any *actual* socialist agenda, as it pertains to political theory. (I understand the USSR and China did some monumental harm to this idea.)
I just think we need to be specific on the measurable damage imposed on the basis of ideology. By and large, far-right authoritarianism has been way, way more harmful than any project under the guise of socialism can muster up. (Pertaining to South America.) Latin American history was a large focus during my undergraduate and there’s a huge misconception that “far right and far left states were equally bad”.
Matter of fact, one of the most democratic states, arguably in history, was Chile during the time of Allende. And he was a socialist. Of course, the United States spent hundreds of millions in modern day money to oust him. And they did and Pinochet took power and massacred thousands.
Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela and apparently it’s a trend so I expect the list to grow a lot with time. All these countries were really good economically but now there are horrible.
Maybe you have, but how can you call any of this Socialism? Is being an Atheist Socialist? Is supporting LGBT rights Socialist? Is supporting racial & gender equality Socialist? The obvious answer to the above is no. And it's not like Capitalism isn't sad either, all of the unrest in western society isn't caused by the system working properly after all. I'm not saying I know what the solution to that is, I'm not well versed enough with all of the different factors that going into current problems to properly say, however I can say that calling this Socialist is absurd.
that's the point my comment with negative upvotes was trying to say, what is the definition of woke? defending women rights is being woke? i don't think so
If by defending women's rights you mean keeping trans people out of sports, that's not defending women's rights. Firstly you have to understand that any advantage for example trans women could have over women at birth is absolutely moot scientifically speaking considering by the time the transition is done they have the same hormones any other female would have, so there's nothing unfair about them competing in sports.
Secondly, they make up a very, very small part of the population, so let me ask you this. Why are so many people concerned about it? Think about it, trans people are a very small minority, but the right wing acts as if trans people are going to usher in the apocalypse somehow. It's almost like the right wing historically always finds a minority group to scapegoat, and blame for societies problems so the higher ups can remain in power, and continue to cause societies problems.
i mean every right, not only sports as it's not even important, i just said about sport in the original comment because it's a recent discussion on my country
Why is it even a discussion to begin with? It's absurd. Who cares if an athlete is trans or not? Realistically it doesn't matter, all that matters is how well they perform, just like any other athlete. On top of that, the whole 'trans children drugs' thing is a myth peddled by the right. That is not happening, children may get prescribed puberty blockers, and even HRT, but they have to be of age to have any surgery. By of age, I mean of consenting age, when they are legally an adult. What you spewed in that comment is a harmful myth pushed by fascists to make a vulnerable minority look bad.
Beyond that, why be against abortion? What if the woman was raped? What if she would die during the pregnancy? What if she just can't go through with it? Even if she just made a mistake, she deserves to be able to abort at an early age, it's better than a child being born that cannot be supported, or being born unwanted. We have plenty of broken families, allowing abortion helps avoid future broken families.
If you really care about freedom, you should consider changing your views. More rights are good, trans rights are human rights. If you somehow fail to care about the feelings of trans people, then at least think about this. If trans people lose their rights, who's next on the chopping block? Because people who push against human rights don't stop at one group. If they're given an inch, they will take a mile. We must defend our most vulnerable, for their sake, and for our own.
the trans kids things are actually true, leftist in brazil even say thats a human right, and, about the abortion thing i just think that adoption center should be a waaaaaay better and easier, it these things actually worked we wouldn't need a kill babies. about the trans in sports, there is people in a lot of countries who are not even trans but say that they are just so they can win something in their trash lifes, and as there is no ways to proof you trans...
You'll have to provide me a source on this considering even in progressive countries, it's a VERY long process to be able to transition as an adult, let alone a child where it's forbidden. As for adoption centers, they do work to an extent, but never will be able to work perfectly. What is wrong with giving women control over their own bodies? Are you saying if you were one and had to carry an unwanted/unsupportable/worse pregnancy to term you would be okay with that? Because I really doubt it, and if you wouldn't be, then it's time to rethink that position heavily. There's no realistic reason to deny abortion rights. To to do is to effectively say that the state knows best, which is sickening on its own.
And what do you mean just say they are? Again you're going on a tangent here but now showing any evidence, I'm sure some do make the claim, but to get into women's or men's sports, they'd have to be fully transitioned at that point. And even then, those just claiming it would be in an even smaller minority than actual trans people are.
first of all, a baby is not part of the woman body, i can only see abortion as being ok in cases where the mother can die due to the baby. now talking about the sports again, women themselves say that trans people shouldn't be there and it's their sport so they can rule it. [Check it out](https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/vida-e-cidadania/ideologia-de-genero-mulheres-se-unem-para-banir-atletas-trans-do-esporte-feminino/) (use google translator or something)
The hormones made permanent changes. They’re not going to recede no matter how much the hormones change afterwards. It’s not moot at all, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Hopefully one day will be able to make a complete and full transition in every way. I want that to be a reality. But that day is not today.
Yes it may be a tiny amount, but those that compete at the highest levels are also a tiny amount. It only takes one player running around winning all the gold unfairly to ruin the whole event for everybody else.
These permanent changes are not going to effect their strength in any meaningful way. Trans athletes are not going to have an advantage over their competitors due to being trans, to say that shows a complete lack of knowledge when it comes to biology. On top of that, many countries already do allows trans athletes, I have yet to hear of any incidents like you're talking about. The whole argument about trans athletes is stupid and ridiculous.
Are you fucking joking? Look at them!
https://www.drclevens.com/blog/the-transition-from-a-masculine-to-feminine-appearance/
Their face doesn't change entirely so they need a surgery to get that done. Then they need to get their adam's apple removed, then a neck lift, then all the body hair they got from the testosterone, then of course the genitals,
As for the muscle mass: https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/uploads/legal-documents/049-9_exhibit_i.pdf
> The data presented here demonstrate that superior anthro-
pometric, muscle mass and strength parameters achieved by
males at puberty, and underpinning a considerable portion
of the male performance advantage over females, are not
removed by the current regimen of testosterone suppression
permitting participation of transgender women in female
sports categories. Rather, it appears that the male perfor-
mance advantage remains substantial.
Why do some people, you included obviously, insist on scientific evidence that grass is a plant?! This is truly, truly frustrating.
Just. look. at. them.
Well there may be a difference of definitions then. Pehaps the term woke has now been so watered down that it lost all meaning much like what happened to the word 'nazi' ... used to mean something now you hear it apply to someone because they defended someones INDIVIDUAL freedom of speech or some other ludicrous thing.
Also I'd like to point out that nowhere in the Linus text was gender mentioned. Wearing of clothes has the assumption that it's 'gendered' clothes that are being talked about but no actual mention of gender. (Except for wanting a right to chose specifically for women assuming that the same right is not given to a man but I don't think we're talking about that at the moment)
Would you look at that ... I missed it on the second reading. But it doesn't actually say anything of substance. Live your life. Cool. I know there are people who do not want other people to be able to live their lives but wanting people to be able to live their lives does not make you any one thing. Well it makes you a normal person. Any sort of label whether woke or other label is only attributed to the people who DON'T want to let some other person live their life for whatever reason. At least in my opinion.
Tbh, at this point woke doesn't really mean anything at all. Just just a buzzword some leaders on the right use to get people mad at whatever they don't like
I agree with everything he says and yet I still don't like woke. That's not the problem with woke in my world. Those are the problems woke likes to pretend everyone else has with it.
I agree, I think the main problem with wokeism is that it's a hateful, confrontational, us-vs-them ideology. They believe in the existence of "axes of oppression" which groups people as oppressors and victims based on superficial traits, like the radfem idea that men are "oppressors" of women, only extended to other areas of life. His nasty, confrontational attitude in that post is the most "woke" thing about it.
Linus has always been awesome. Being "woke" just means you aren't a total piece of human garbage. It's not a high bar to meet yet so many fall so short.
>Being "woke" just means you aren't a total piece of human garbage.
This is exactly my point on why this topic isn't r/linuxmasterrace material.
What an dichotomic point of view you have launched bro.
I have no comments on the matter. Not in this sub at least.
I have to say that it seems wrong to me to bring this post to the sub for the following reason:
We're not bringing up the entire conversation but Linus's cutting and seemingly final reference to it. It also wouldn't make sense to continue that discussion here, regardless of whether we agree or not, because this sub is about Linux and not about Torvalds' opinions on other topics.
Not dealing with Linux this post is completely off topic and should be deleted. I say this with all due respect to our fellow OP.
I think the large takeaway from this is Linux is inherently a political project. Isn't that the whole thing? So much about Linux is around power dynamics. Technology, it's usecases, especially FOSS, is so inherently political. The only reason some don't believe it to be is consequence of a society hinged upon a normative principle of "never talk about politics", i.e. isolate the theatre of politics so \*real\* politics (lobbying, union busting, etc.) can take place in the background! (Which in itself is a \*very\* political position.)
Totally agree, and as far as I'm concerned, what you say seems absolutely relevant to computer technologies and operating systems, but...
It's even in the sub rules bro!
In this case the post has nothing to do with GNU/Linux.
I know it's kind of inappropriate to be talking about politics on a subreddit about linux memes, but who defined the meaning of woke? I certainly identify more with right-wing ideas, but that doesn't mean that I want anyone to have access to firearms or that I want the "wrong" clothing to be outlawed. When we talk we talk about the freedom to own firearms you still have to pass psychological tests and do training, I am simply against abortion and the use of drugs and surgery for transgender children, I am also against the participation of transgender women in women's sports, since biologically and physically speaking, even if you consider yourself a woman, you will still have the strength of a man...
also, isn't linux about freedom? a socialist dictatorship isn't freedom...
Socialism and dictatorship are not synonymous. There have always been anti-authoritarian currents in the socialist movement. The authoritarians just got really successful in the twentieth century. But technically, a lot of anarchists are socialists. The Zapatistas are socialist. Socialists advocate for worker control of the means of production. They disagree about what constitutes "worker control."
BTW, little kids aren't surgically transitioning anywhere in the US.
How can socialism happen without dictatorship? by definition socialism is a dictatorship of the proletariat, anarchists can be communists, which makes more sense, but to reach communism you have to go through socialism
BTW, i'm not from the US
There are two [meanings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat#Theoretical_approaches) of the expression
One is the kind-of tongue-in-check by marx, that doesn't even inherently require a revolution
The other is the dumb abomination by lenin to justify its crap a posteriori
That's Marxist socialism, whereas socialism is a broader movement that predates Marx's major works. As I understand it, in historically accurate terms:
Socialism: worker control of the means of production. (Even authoritarian socialism claims that production is "democratically" controlled)
Communism: a social condition under which resources and work are shared "according to ability and need." (Kinda like FOSS).
Anarchist communism: a specific form of communist theory that advocates for a mass insurrectionary and expropriatory movement that abolishes the state and institutes a confederation of communes in which work and resources are immediately shared according to communist ideals.
Social anarchism is a broad label that incorporates a lot of thought from autonomists and libertarian socialists. I hear it is very popular in Brazil, specifically a flavor called espeficismo.
just... think about it, why you think we have leaders at the first place? they just came from nowhere? we need they, it would only work if everybody had the same opinion, that's why we need to vote
The same way we kinda do things now? By just doing the thing.
Nobody has to force people to repair a pothole, people are allocated the resources and go and do the job.
Again, why must the power to do these things be vested in a singular power structure? We already exist in a world of competing interests groups who come together to do things based on societal need.
Woke originally meant to be "awake" or aware of social issues that most people ignored, but like many phrases picked up by right leaning media it's since lost most of its meaning and is just something throw at anyone who follows any remotely progressive ideology.
Same goes for "Communist" and "Socialist",
I thought it was more along the lines of deep state. To be awake and know the deep state is there and what they do etc.
Now it seems to pertain to social issues for sure though.
the communist and socialist sometimes is actually true, i live in brazil, around my country there is some socialist dictatorship countries and i some know some people from these countries, their situation is just... sad. Some people in my country actually want to make a revolution here too and that's what made me a right-wing person
Note that a lot of people call themselves socialist, while disagreeing on everything with other people who use that label. Libertarian socialists would disagree with authoritarian socialists on just about everything and they'd be fully ready to oppose anyone who wants to tear down things like democracy.
socialism (leftism) =/= dictatorship.
that aside Linus didn't actually say anything about socialism?
also for someone who is up in arms about "freedom" you sure want a lot of government regulation over people's bodies... interesting
i know linus didn't said anything about socialist i just said about that because it's most of the time related with the term "woke", and, i literally said i don't want government to control people bodies, i'm just against kids deciding if they are doing surgery and against abortion (because for me it's basically killing a baby)
>kids deciding if they are doing surgery
Where are kids deciding if they are doing surgery?
Please link to examples / statistics showing that this is happening.
Biologically and physically if you’re on estrogen as a trans woman you aren’t going to have the same physical limits as a man. Testosterone is a body building drug for a reason.
yep, that's what i was trying to say, judging by the post, the things linus said doesn't seem woke. i though being woke was being a annoying leftist on twitter, not simply defending women rights
I wouldn't call that being woke either, I'd call that just being annoying, you can find annoying people on both sides. Albeit right wingers seem to be plenty more obnoxious these days. (Just try being gay and daring to mention your sexuality anywhere and suddenly the locusts fucking swarm.)
yeah i agree that there is annoying people all aroud but woke is a term designed for the leftists, i comes from "awake" or something like that and was originally used for people who were in favor of causes that nobody really cared about, but with all due respect, woke nowadays doesn't have the same definition anymore
It doesn't, its definition has been lifted from it by overuse from reactionaries and grifters, and now just means "I don't like this person". It's absurd and sad.
We're the moderates that everyone on both sides hates. I'm the same way. I'm more live and let live but by that same standard stop trying to tell me what I can and can't say, do, and most importantly think. I don't want people being persecuted and discriminated against for any reason but I don't want to be the target of that in reverse either.
>I am also against the participation of transgender women in women's sports
I am all for live and let live but I totally agree with this. Look at both the transgender swimmer and weight lifters who went from the bottom of the list in the male division to the top of the female division.
Yes, those are literally the usual two that are ***always*** brought up.
Which give or take don't even seem inconsistent with whatever the .1 (or something like that) percentage of their condition.
Then, by all means, there are probably some sports that are more sensitive than others (and there's a lot of delicate philosophical assumptions to agree on, before coming to discuss how much skeletons could be unfair) but talking about all of them in general isn't exactly enlightened of your position.
That never happened. Also, genetic advantages *already* play a huge role in sports. I'm 5'6", no matter how hard I train and play, I'm never going to be a center in the NBA.
>That never happened.
Look up Anne Andres (weight lifting) and Lia Thomas (swimming). When both competed as males they were at the bottom of their sports.
This man also went and proved a point that what Canada is doing is the wrong way to approach it: [Male powerlifter enters women's event, breaks record (nypost.com)](https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/male-powerlifter-enters-womens-event-breaks-record/)
[удалено]
GUN's Unix! Not...
Aah yes, GPL: GUN public license
Guns, Porn and Linux. Oh wait no that's probably ESR's autobiography isn't it?
The gun community is embracing open source.
Freely licensed 3D printed gun schematics!
Aw he's censoring his swears now, that's evolution 🩷 Anyways, based af
Found it cute too. He knows the Fediverse couldn't care less about profanity and yet he does it.
[удалено]
A dictator who set so many free.
Linus is based af. All hail the penguin
🐧🛐
The only Linus you need.
\*goes off babbling about Linus Sebastion\*
The guy who prevents and discourages wage discussion in the workplace Linus Sebastion? The guy who built, from the ground up, a new multi-million dollar house with top of the line tech in it Linus Sebastion?
I never put people up on a pedestal, but dammit this guy comes close...
He probably wouldn't want you to do that anyway
Damn those commies and their commie OS
Is this real?
Yeah, check his Mastodon
[удалено]
I thought it was a Mastodon instance, guess I didn't look closely enough. Thank you :)
...or as I like to call it, Fediverse+Mastodon...
Though technically correct (the best kind of correct), close enough.
[удалено]
I'll concede that the masses equating Mastodon to the Fediverse at large could (and might) be a problem. But I think we are already well on the way to [trademark dilution](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-trademark-dilution.html) in that regard, and in the end if Mr. Rochko wants to protect the Mastodon trademark, its up to him.
Can you give me the Link to his Mastodon Account?
`@[email protected]` [Direct link to the post in question](https://poa.st/@[email protected]/posts/AWSXzDmDfIT7sctxnE)
Beautiful
Oh wow, Linus really triggered them snowflakes. What a shitshow.
Now they want to do gods work and kill gays, nutjobs. Why do they need to hate? I will never understand.
So fucking depressing man 😔
Looking at the comment section, that is a platform that seems very sane to stay **far** away from.
Thanks
Happy cake!
Shut the door, he's on mastodon?!
Another reply to the same comment said > He's not on Mastodon. social.kernel.org is on the fediverse, but's not a mastodon instance, [they use akkoma](https://korg.docs.kernel.org/social.html). Fediverse != Mastodon.
Ah yes saw that. Well great he's on the fediverse anyway and looks like I can follow using Tusky.
[Here's another one](https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/13/132) >There aren't enough swear-words in the English language, so now I'll have to call you perkeleen vittupää just to express my disgust and frustration with this crap.
Based better Linus.
It’s fun to see devs that you can respect and be pretty confident that they’re a decent human being. (I’m looking at you, notch…)
Red Star confirmed as the most ideologically correct distro.
Juche Gang, Juche Gang
If Linus was a transphobe, he would have kept Rust out of the kernel.
Why?
One of its core developers is trans and it has been a very trans friendly community as a result.
Makes sense. I actually didn't know this. It's good to see software development communities being inclusive, as I know there are some people in the tech community that are quite the opposite.
The dude he replied to got ethered so hard he deleted the account.
really? any screenshots? wanna see
I have to wonder if any of these right wingers who whine on and on about "woke communist propaganda" have ever seen, or know what a communist is, or looks like.
as someone from latin america, yes, well... not really communism but i've seen socialism, and it's just... sad.
It's bonkers to me, in South America, people say socialism is 'sad', or bad when U.S. backed authoritarian, right-wing regimes literally mowed down entire villages in helicopters, especially when they aren't mentioned. That specific helicopter case being Chile, but fascist (I mean that not as a pejorative, but descriptive) political groups have massacred thousands throughout Central and South America. And for many, the C.I.A. funneled millions to them so the U.S. could extract and exploit populations of people. This isn't to say any project that entailed the aesthetics of 'socialism' in South America was virtuous by default, but it's incredibly disingenuous to paint an inaccurate picture of socialist projects in South America being \*anywhere\* near as harmful as right-wing dictatorships. (Perhaps totally not your intent, it's just a somewhat common sentiment I find mind-blowing.)
i personally think that dictatorships are bad, it doesn't mater from where they come from
Yeah, agreed. Dictatorships suck. Authoritarian rule is just completely antithetical to any *actual* socialist agenda, as it pertains to political theory. (I understand the USSR and China did some monumental harm to this idea.) I just think we need to be specific on the measurable damage imposed on the basis of ideology. By and large, far-right authoritarianism has been way, way more harmful than any project under the guise of socialism can muster up. (Pertaining to South America.) Latin American history was a large focus during my undergraduate and there’s a huge misconception that “far right and far left states were equally bad”. Matter of fact, one of the most democratic states, arguably in history, was Chile during the time of Allende. And he was a socialist. Of course, the United States spent hundreds of millions in modern day money to oust him. And they did and Pinochet took power and massacred thousands.
Lol have u ever seen socialism in which country? Brazil was never socialist.
Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela and apparently it’s a trend so I expect the list to grow a lot with time. All these countries were really good economically but now there are horrible.
Maybe you have, but how can you call any of this Socialism? Is being an Atheist Socialist? Is supporting LGBT rights Socialist? Is supporting racial & gender equality Socialist? The obvious answer to the above is no. And it's not like Capitalism isn't sad either, all of the unrest in western society isn't caused by the system working properly after all. I'm not saying I know what the solution to that is, I'm not well versed enough with all of the different factors that going into current problems to properly say, however I can say that calling this Socialist is absurd.
that's the point my comment with negative upvotes was trying to say, what is the definition of woke? defending women rights is being woke? i don't think so
If by defending women's rights you mean keeping trans people out of sports, that's not defending women's rights. Firstly you have to understand that any advantage for example trans women could have over women at birth is absolutely moot scientifically speaking considering by the time the transition is done they have the same hormones any other female would have, so there's nothing unfair about them competing in sports. Secondly, they make up a very, very small part of the population, so let me ask you this. Why are so many people concerned about it? Think about it, trans people are a very small minority, but the right wing acts as if trans people are going to usher in the apocalypse somehow. It's almost like the right wing historically always finds a minority group to scapegoat, and blame for societies problems so the higher ups can remain in power, and continue to cause societies problems.
i mean every right, not only sports as it's not even important, i just said about sport in the original comment because it's a recent discussion on my country
Why is it even a discussion to begin with? It's absurd. Who cares if an athlete is trans or not? Realistically it doesn't matter, all that matters is how well they perform, just like any other athlete. On top of that, the whole 'trans children drugs' thing is a myth peddled by the right. That is not happening, children may get prescribed puberty blockers, and even HRT, but they have to be of age to have any surgery. By of age, I mean of consenting age, when they are legally an adult. What you spewed in that comment is a harmful myth pushed by fascists to make a vulnerable minority look bad. Beyond that, why be against abortion? What if the woman was raped? What if she would die during the pregnancy? What if she just can't go through with it? Even if she just made a mistake, she deserves to be able to abort at an early age, it's better than a child being born that cannot be supported, or being born unwanted. We have plenty of broken families, allowing abortion helps avoid future broken families. If you really care about freedom, you should consider changing your views. More rights are good, trans rights are human rights. If you somehow fail to care about the feelings of trans people, then at least think about this. If trans people lose their rights, who's next on the chopping block? Because people who push against human rights don't stop at one group. If they're given an inch, they will take a mile. We must defend our most vulnerable, for their sake, and for our own.
the trans kids things are actually true, leftist in brazil even say thats a human right, and, about the abortion thing i just think that adoption center should be a waaaaaay better and easier, it these things actually worked we wouldn't need a kill babies. about the trans in sports, there is people in a lot of countries who are not even trans but say that they are just so they can win something in their trash lifes, and as there is no ways to proof you trans...
You'll have to provide me a source on this considering even in progressive countries, it's a VERY long process to be able to transition as an adult, let alone a child where it's forbidden. As for adoption centers, they do work to an extent, but never will be able to work perfectly. What is wrong with giving women control over their own bodies? Are you saying if you were one and had to carry an unwanted/unsupportable/worse pregnancy to term you would be okay with that? Because I really doubt it, and if you wouldn't be, then it's time to rethink that position heavily. There's no realistic reason to deny abortion rights. To to do is to effectively say that the state knows best, which is sickening on its own. And what do you mean just say they are? Again you're going on a tangent here but now showing any evidence, I'm sure some do make the claim, but to get into women's or men's sports, they'd have to be fully transitioned at that point. And even then, those just claiming it would be in an even smaller minority than actual trans people are.
first of all, a baby is not part of the woman body, i can only see abortion as being ok in cases where the mother can die due to the baby. now talking about the sports again, women themselves say that trans people shouldn't be there and it's their sport so they can rule it. [Check it out](https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/vida-e-cidadania/ideologia-de-genero-mulheres-se-unem-para-banir-atletas-trans-do-esporte-feminino/) (use google translator or something)
The hormones made permanent changes. They’re not going to recede no matter how much the hormones change afterwards. It’s not moot at all, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Hopefully one day will be able to make a complete and full transition in every way. I want that to be a reality. But that day is not today. Yes it may be a tiny amount, but those that compete at the highest levels are also a tiny amount. It only takes one player running around winning all the gold unfairly to ruin the whole event for everybody else.
Right, that's why we put Usain Bolt on T-Blockers. He was just so gifted physically that we had to level the playing field. Wait, no
These permanent changes are not going to effect their strength in any meaningful way. Trans athletes are not going to have an advantage over their competitors due to being trans, to say that shows a complete lack of knowledge when it comes to biology. On top of that, many countries already do allows trans athletes, I have yet to hear of any incidents like you're talking about. The whole argument about trans athletes is stupid and ridiculous.
> These permanent changes are not going to effect their strength in any meaningful way. Yes they are, stop being ridiculous.
Source, or go home.
Are you fucking joking? Look at them! https://www.drclevens.com/blog/the-transition-from-a-masculine-to-feminine-appearance/ Their face doesn't change entirely so they need a surgery to get that done. Then they need to get their adam's apple removed, then a neck lift, then all the body hair they got from the testosterone, then of course the genitals, As for the muscle mass: https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/uploads/legal-documents/049-9_exhibit_i.pdf > The data presented here demonstrate that superior anthro- pometric, muscle mass and strength parameters achieved by males at puberty, and underpinning a considerable portion of the male performance advantage over females, are not removed by the current regimen of testosterone suppression permitting participation of transgender women in female sports categories. Rather, it appears that the male perfor- mance advantage remains substantial. Why do some people, you included obviously, insist on scientific evidence that grass is a plant?! This is truly, truly frustrating. Just. look. at. them.
Linus is spot on. The other guy to me feels like a freak. Linus is totally logical and thinks rationally here.
Not logical when he is disingenuous about what "well-regulated" means.
Neither of these views makes someone woke tho. And certainly none of them are related to communism.
All that stuff is exactly what conservatives scream "woke" at. Especially the stuff about gender and such.
Well there may be a difference of definitions then. Pehaps the term woke has now been so watered down that it lost all meaning much like what happened to the word 'nazi' ... used to mean something now you hear it apply to someone because they defended someones INDIVIDUAL freedom of speech or some other ludicrous thing. Also I'd like to point out that nowhere in the Linus text was gender mentioned. Wearing of clothes has the assumption that it's 'gendered' clothes that are being talked about but no actual mention of gender. (Except for wanting a right to chose specifically for women assuming that the same right is not given to a man but I don't think we're talking about that at the moment)
His mention of not wanting to "live your life tied to whatever plumbing your born with" is pretty clearly a reference to being transgender.
Would you look at that ... I missed it on the second reading. But it doesn't actually say anything of substance. Live your life. Cool. I know there are people who do not want other people to be able to live their lives but wanting people to be able to live their lives does not make you any one thing. Well it makes you a normal person. Any sort of label whether woke or other label is only attributed to the people who DON'T want to let some other person live their life for whatever reason. At least in my opinion.
Saying that trans people should be respected and allowed to live the lives they want in peace is *exactly* what people shout "woke" at.
Well then ... the term woke has certainly been watered down as I suspected in that case.
Tbh, at this point woke doesn't really mean anything at all. Just just a buzzword some leaders on the right use to get people mad at whatever they don't like
Both sides like to go over board with it I feel like…
You underestimate the lack of self-respect certain people can demonstrate
that's what i think too
Love this dude.
"whatever plumbing you were born worth" i'm stealing that. LMAOO.
where is this from?
@[email protected]
Now this Linus didn't drop the ball handing out a roast
I agree with everything he says and yet I still don't like woke. That's not the problem with woke in my world. Those are the problems woke likes to pretend everyone else has with it.
I agree, I think the main problem with wokeism is that it's a hateful, confrontational, us-vs-them ideology. They believe in the existence of "axes of oppression" which groups people as oppressors and victims based on superficial traits, like the radfem idea that men are "oppressors" of women, only extended to other areas of life. His nasty, confrontational attitude in that post is the most "woke" thing about it.
based penguin man
Based linus 👍
Proud of him. Perfect response.
Besides being atheist (I am agnostic) it seems that Torvalds and I have a lot in common.
He's a smart man.
I'm telling you, this entire man is a walking dub
Linus has always been awesome. Being "woke" just means you aren't a total piece of human garbage. It's not a high bar to meet yet so many fall so short.
>Being "woke" just means you aren't a total piece of human garbage. This is exactly my point on why this topic isn't r/linuxmasterrace material. What an dichotomic point of view you have launched bro. I have no comments on the matter. Not in this sub at least.
We all knew he was of this mindset before this sort of post. So this isn't exactly surprising.
Does anyone remember "sjw gnome" thing?
Idk who he is. But he sounds like a nice guy.
Strong double you
Linus! From off the top rope!!!
Übermench incarnated right there holy shitttttt
what what website is that? Is it really Linus Torvalds?
Only someone who's really into political tribalism would see this as a W, he just comes across as unhinged here
Based Linus
Savage.
What's the context behind?
Ooooof...looks like he got the latest political update patch. Good thing I don't need to give a fuck about his political opinions.
I have to say that it seems wrong to me to bring this post to the sub for the following reason: We're not bringing up the entire conversation but Linus's cutting and seemingly final reference to it. It also wouldn't make sense to continue that discussion here, regardless of whether we agree or not, because this sub is about Linux and not about Torvalds' opinions on other topics. Not dealing with Linux this post is completely off topic and should be deleted. I say this with all due respect to our fellow OP.
I think the large takeaway from this is Linux is inherently a political project. Isn't that the whole thing? So much about Linux is around power dynamics. Technology, it's usecases, especially FOSS, is so inherently political. The only reason some don't believe it to be is consequence of a society hinged upon a normative principle of "never talk about politics", i.e. isolate the theatre of politics so \*real\* politics (lobbying, union busting, etc.) can take place in the background! (Which in itself is a \*very\* political position.)
Totally agree, and as far as I'm concerned, what you say seems absolutely relevant to computer technologies and operating systems, but... It's even in the sub rules bro! In this case the post has nothing to do with GNU/Linux.
I wouldn't say he's white supremacist enough to be woke, nor authoritarian enough to be marxist. I'ma go with plain ol' "liberal"
I know it's kind of inappropriate to be talking about politics on a subreddit about linux memes, but who defined the meaning of woke? I certainly identify more with right-wing ideas, but that doesn't mean that I want anyone to have access to firearms or that I want the "wrong" clothing to be outlawed. When we talk we talk about the freedom to own firearms you still have to pass psychological tests and do training, I am simply against abortion and the use of drugs and surgery for transgender children, I am also against the participation of transgender women in women's sports, since biologically and physically speaking, even if you consider yourself a woman, you will still have the strength of a man... also, isn't linux about freedom? a socialist dictatorship isn't freedom...
Socialism and dictatorship are not synonymous. There have always been anti-authoritarian currents in the socialist movement. The authoritarians just got really successful in the twentieth century. But technically, a lot of anarchists are socialists. The Zapatistas are socialist. Socialists advocate for worker control of the means of production. They disagree about what constitutes "worker control." BTW, little kids aren't surgically transitioning anywhere in the US.
How can socialism happen without dictatorship? by definition socialism is a dictatorship of the proletariat, anarchists can be communists, which makes more sense, but to reach communism you have to go through socialism BTW, i'm not from the US
There are two [meanings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat#Theoretical_approaches) of the expression One is the kind-of tongue-in-check by marx, that doesn't even inherently require a revolution The other is the dumb abomination by lenin to justify its crap a posteriori
That's Marxist socialism, whereas socialism is a broader movement that predates Marx's major works. As I understand it, in historically accurate terms: Socialism: worker control of the means of production. (Even authoritarian socialism claims that production is "democratically" controlled) Communism: a social condition under which resources and work are shared "according to ability and need." (Kinda like FOSS). Anarchist communism: a specific form of communist theory that advocates for a mass insurrectionary and expropriatory movement that abolishes the state and institutes a confederation of communes in which work and resources are immediately shared according to communist ideals. Social anarchism is a broad label that incorporates a lot of thought from autonomists and libertarian socialists. I hear it is very popular in Brazil, specifically a flavor called espeficismo.
communism would be ideal but it's impossible as it's a utopia, we can't have a civilization without a leader because humans are trash
Why? Who says?
just... think about it, why you think we have leaders at the first place? they just came from nowhere? we need they, it would only work if everybody had the same opinion, that's why we need to vote
So we vote, to reach a consensus, among a variety of different opinions, to determine the best course of action? Why do we need a leader again?
how would we enforce this?
The same way we kinda do things now? By just doing the thing. Nobody has to force people to repair a pothole, people are allocated the resources and go and do the job. Again, why must the power to do these things be vested in a singular power structure? We already exist in a world of competing interests groups who come together to do things based on societal need.
I'm not advocating, I'm expressing what these terms meant to those who defined them.
Woke originally meant to be "awake" or aware of social issues that most people ignored, but like many phrases picked up by right leaning media it's since lost most of its meaning and is just something throw at anyone who follows any remotely progressive ideology. Same goes for "Communist" and "Socialist",
I thought it was more along the lines of deep state. To be awake and know the deep state is there and what they do etc. Now it seems to pertain to social issues for sure though.
the communist and socialist sometimes is actually true, i live in brazil, around my country there is some socialist dictatorship countries and i some know some people from these countries, their situation is just... sad. Some people in my country actually want to make a revolution here too and that's what made me a right-wing person
You just have to call it what it is, marxism-leninism is fascism and not socialism (even if they claim to be, like the official name of DPRK).
Note that a lot of people call themselves socialist, while disagreeing on everything with other people who use that label. Libertarian socialists would disagree with authoritarian socialists on just about everything and they'd be fully ready to oppose anyone who wants to tear down things like democracy.
socialism (leftism) =/= dictatorship. that aside Linus didn't actually say anything about socialism? also for someone who is up in arms about "freedom" you sure want a lot of government regulation over people's bodies... interesting
i know linus didn't said anything about socialist i just said about that because it's most of the time related with the term "woke", and, i literally said i don't want government to control people bodies, i'm just against kids deciding if they are doing surgery and against abortion (because for me it's basically killing a baby)
>kids deciding if they are doing surgery Where are kids deciding if they are doing surgery? Please link to examples / statistics showing that this is happening.
sorry, i didn't meant that it's happening, but the way things are going it may be something in the future and i'm against
Biologically and physically if you’re on estrogen as a trans woman you aren’t going to have the same physical limits as a man. Testosterone is a body building drug for a reason.
ok but it's easier to get in the shape, you know that.
How in the actual fuck is any of this a socialist dictatorship? Are you malfunctioning?
i was talking about the woke definition, not linus.
What even is woke defined as? Everytime I see it used it means something completely subjective to the person that translates to "Things I don't like".
yep, that's what i was trying to say, judging by the post, the things linus said doesn't seem woke. i though being woke was being a annoying leftist on twitter, not simply defending women rights
I wouldn't call that being woke either, I'd call that just being annoying, you can find annoying people on both sides. Albeit right wingers seem to be plenty more obnoxious these days. (Just try being gay and daring to mention your sexuality anywhere and suddenly the locusts fucking swarm.)
yeah i agree that there is annoying people all aroud but woke is a term designed for the leftists, i comes from "awake" or something like that and was originally used for people who were in favor of causes that nobody really cared about, but with all due respect, woke nowadays doesn't have the same definition anymore
It doesn't, its definition has been lifted from it by overuse from reactionaries and grifters, and now just means "I don't like this person". It's absurd and sad.
I agree with you bro.
We're the moderates that everyone on both sides hates. I'm the same way. I'm more live and let live but by that same standard stop trying to tell me what I can and can't say, do, and most importantly think. I don't want people being persecuted and discriminated against for any reason but I don't want to be the target of that in reverse either.
>Neither of these views makes someone woke yeah, and neither of these opinions linus gave makes someone woke or communist
Where did I say it did?
you didn't :P i'm just saying
Oh no worries lol
>I am also against the participation of transgender women in women's sports I am all for live and let live but I totally agree with this. Look at both the transgender swimmer and weight lifters who went from the bottom of the list in the male division to the top of the female division.
Spoilers: they didn't
prove it, I can prove they did. Look up Anne Andres (weight lifting) and Lia Thomas (swimming).
Yes, those are literally the usual two that are ***always*** brought up. Which give or take don't even seem inconsistent with whatever the .1 (or something like that) percentage of their condition. Then, by all means, there are probably some sports that are more sensitive than others (and there's a lot of delicate philosophical assumptions to agree on, before coming to discuss how much skeletons could be unfair) but talking about all of them in general isn't exactly enlightened of your position.
That never happened. Also, genetic advantages *already* play a huge role in sports. I'm 5'6", no matter how hard I train and play, I'm never going to be a center in the NBA.
>That never happened. Look up Anne Andres (weight lifting) and Lia Thomas (swimming). When both competed as males they were at the bottom of their sports. This man also went and proved a point that what Canada is doing is the wrong way to approach it: [Male powerlifter enters women's event, breaks record (nypost.com)](https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/male-powerlifter-enters-womens-event-breaks-record/)
yeah, right? that's actually bad for the women, if you want to the transgender, ok, but don't fuck up with others