linux-kernel - Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 25 Sep 2018 12:38:45 -0500
From:   "\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@...il.com>
To:     Christoph Conrads <contact@...istoph-conrads.name>
Cc:     esr@...rsus.com, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Edward Cree <ec429@...tab.net>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.

>> And there is no level on which this is anything but bad.
>
> In this context, I want to mention the tweet by the CoC author from
> August 29, 2018 [1]:
>
>> All software is political.
>
> This tweet was posted as a response to your article "Non-discrimination
> is a core value of open source" stating that politics should be kept
> separate from work (in an open source community):

Is this at all consequential to Lessig's (Harvard Law professor) book
"Code is Law"?

There are two separate issues:  1) the political revancy of F/OSS and
2) the politics of CoCs.

It's like the Matrix:

Through one door, the community can either choose to stay political
neutered and let RMS (and company) handle all of the politics OR it
can see itself as revolutionary (because of its insistence on freedom)
and stay political, and see just how the rabbit hole goes.

Which should it be?

Mark