• michaelrose@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not a conspiracy theory to imagine that IBM’s vision for Linux compared to 2000s or 2010s era Linux is opaque, complicated, and enterprisey. It’s who they are.

    The grandparent comment

    Linux community is so inherently meritocratic that one can’t meaningfully force anything upon any large group of them.

    Is pure fantasy. Software projects are dictatorships of those willing to put in the work, not meritocracies. There is nothing immoral or wrong about this but we should be realists. The entire software ecosystem is dominated by oft shitty good enough solutions which people poured enough work into to solve problems well enough.

    • monk@lemmy.unboiled.info
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      IBM’s vision

      Anybody can have a vision, but it’s the work that matters. I’ll be worried when they become a player.

      Software projects are dictatorships of those willing to put in the work, not meritocracies.

      Most linux distros are slight variations on the best components available. Yes, one can put in resources, do a great job and now everyone switches to the fruits of their labor. No, it does nothing to stop another player from one-upping them and taking the lead with their next best good enough. In political terms, dictatorships are incompatible with voting with one’s feet.

      • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Anybody can have a vision, but it’s the work that matters. I’ll be worried when they become a player.

        Did you entirely miss the part where IBM bought Red Hat