Posted on 06/09/2024 8:45:20 AM PDT by fireman15
Diversity & Inclusivity
The power of collaboration is greater when many different perspectives are included.
Addressing Diversity and Inclusivity
A diversity of ideas and contributions, one that originates from a diverse community, from all walks of life, cultures, countries, and skin colors—is vital for building sustainable and healthy open source communities. Individuals from diverse backgrounds inject new and innovative ideas to advance an inclusive and welcoming ecosystem for all. Linux Foundation is committed to building diverse and inclusive communities. Creating those diverse communities requires effort and commitment to creating inclusive and welcoming spaces. We continue to work to address this problem through various initiatives, including:
Inclusive Language Efforts
Communities that adopt inclusive language and actions will be able to attract and retain individuals from diverse backgrounds. The Linux kernel community adapted inclusive language in Linux 5.8 release showing its commitment to Diversity and Inclusion. For other projects, the launched at KubeCon North America to standardize inclusive language across the industry.
Open Hardware Diversity Alliance
The Open Hardware Diversity Alliance is a RISC-V incubating project with the mission of bringing together the open hardware community to provide programs, networking opportunities, and learning to encourage participation and support to the professional advancement of women and underrepresented individuals in open source hardware.
Software Developer Diversity and Inclusion
We are also focusing on Science and Research to Advance Diversity and Inclusion in Software Engineering. Our new Software Developer Diversity and Inclusion (SDDI) project will draw on science and research to deliver resources and best practices that increase D&I in software engineering.
Training and Certification
The Linux Foundation provides free training to women and underrepresented communities to support career development. More than 100,000 women have taken our free, Massive Online Open Courses (MooCs) in partnership with edX.
(Excerpt) Read more at linuxfoundation.org ...
Oh geez, not sure I can live up to that. After all, ShadowAce and Swordmaker were doing their Linux and Apple ping lists long before I started the Windows list, and to be honest I started that one mainly because nobody else had; Windows wasn't even my main OS at the time.
But I appreciate the compliment :-)
LOL! Indeed. An impressively dedicated troll, he is. Perhaps having shot his wad on this one he'll go back to sleep.
Then you obviously broke their license and terms of service. Surely you knew, too. If you want to run Red Hat free and clear you have/had to run the CentOS clone, most everyone knows that.
A true conservative, not a troll, much less a “I don’t care I just want it for free” libtard who get so animated over their free sh!t being questioned.
Didn't Earn It (DEI) is ruining everything but, there is _always_ a but, The Linux Foundation is _NOT_ Linux.
I never claimed that The Linux Foundation is Linux. Far from it... It seems like you did not read the post that you are supposedly responding to.
“I have posted the Linux Foundation's current “Diversity & Inclusivity” statement to try and demonstrate that they are on the same wavelength as the big tech organizations that provide nearly all of their funding. If you look at the funding and income streams for all of the major Linux distributions you will find the same type of thing.”
“The scary thing about Linux distributions is that their ownership, contributors, and motives are more difficult to trace and figure out than those of Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Intel, Google and others. The related security concerns and determining who is actually responsible when bad actors manage to exploit or even contribute vulnerabilities are not clear.”
“I have done quite a bit of research on this over the years and it is always scary. Linux proponents here and just about everywhere else tend to be extremely naive when it comes to the security of their systems. The same major corporations and government agencies that they believe that they are thwarting by using Linux are typically major contributors to Linux development. And they are not doing it from the goodness of their heart... they are doing it because they expect to get a return on their investment.”
If you believe that makes me a “conspiracy zealot”... that indicates to me that you are someone who likely attacks anyone who says anything that you perceive as being negative toward Linux. The vast majority of R/D work being done on nearly all distributions are being funded by corporate and sometimes government interests. The myth that most of this work is being done by altruistic computer geeks is just plain silly in this day and age.
I don't use free tools because they're free, I use them because they're the right tool for a given job. So I buy copies of Windows, and buy Apple and HP devices, and buy VMware licenses, and so forth and so on. Yeah, some of the tools are free (Linux, certain Windows utils, VirtualBox, OpenShell, etc.) but that's just an incentive to donate/contribute when I find it useful.
Your legendary animus toward Linux is your opinion and you're welcome to it. I have no interest in argument.
Having worked with Unix in the AT&T days on 3B2 and 3B5 machines, and been through Ballmer and the SCO follies, and watched as Microsoft finally admitted (only tacitly of course) that Linux was the development environment of choice and decided to support it, I have a different opinion on some aspects.
The historical facts are what they are (or rather, were), but they're in the past. The interesting stuff is yet to come.
I wish you a pleasant (and if you like I, are working, a productive) evening.
Nearly every computer I own dual boots into Linux. I also use virtual machines running versions of Linux for home server duty. I have paid very little for Windows over the years because most new computer systems come with it, and there are nearly always inexpensive upgrade options.
When I have purchased Windows for virtual machines or hardware I assembled myself I have not paid full price by buying from discount software providers such as Stack Social. How do they do it? I don't know for sure but so far none of the licenses that I have purchased have stopped working.
https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-windows-11-pro-6
Most of the major manufacturers such as HP, etc... negotiate discounts on Windows in return for installing voluminous amounts of crapware designed to hawk security software, Microsoft Office, games, and numerous other ways to extract money from consumers. This has been going on for many years.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/crapware-why-manufacturers-install-it-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/
You have been very helpful to me and many others over the years. You also have injected sanity into many discussions that have gone sideways. I like you have no real animosity toward Linux distributions or Apple products. I have installed and used Linux on many devices and have purchased Apple hardware as well. I find it amusing when people get completely bent out of shape when nearly any observation or criticism is posted.
I find it interesting that few people seem to have any concept of how and why Linux distributions are developed. Like you, I have contributed to open-source projects that have been helpful to me. Many of these have been developed by people and companies that hope to make money from this form of distribution.
But the major distributions of Linux that many here feel so strongly about are typically a different animal altogether. I have used various versions of Ubuntu over the years. Canonical is the publisher of Ubuntu; they make money and lots of it. The company just has different type of business model than Microsoft. The owner Mark Shuttleworth has a very interesting history, and his net worth is approximately $636,000,000.
Is Canonical morally superior to Microsoft? Very possibly... but it would be basically impossible for anyone to actually make a definitive judgment. The company's employees give it a 3.2 rating. Microsoft's employees give it a 4.2 rating.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Canonical-Reviews-E230560.htm
Thanks for taking the insults and heat from those who cannot tolerate any criticism or even observation about any of the numerous Linux Distributions and the companies that develop and release them.
What you are experiencing is similar to what happens if one makes an observation about the lack of veracity of global warming data on a MSM forum.
Good to know about stacksocial. I dual boot Kubuntu and Win 7 Pro but I don’t let Win connect to the internet. I’ve gotten used to Win 10 at work so maybe I’ll upgrade my windows side, turn off all the crap and let it get on the web on occasion if need be.
Uhh, no. I got it directly from Red Hat.
With their blessing and after registering.
I must agree about systemd.
I never liked it or its cumbersome cryptic companion, journald.
Apparently that’s something new that only began a couple of years ago. It also appears that it is only licensed for “development” use as well. Nor can you connect to a repository server, for any updates, which makes it very unsafe and completely unpractical.
I’m sure you’ll reply with some hack that works around that license and support requirement, but that’s really just an admission you can’t legally run that way, and have an actual up to date and secure system.
Again--incorrect. I was doing it at least 20 years ago.
For someone who claims to be some sort of tech manager, you are not very current on tech or its licenses.
Recall, if you will, that the GPLv2 (which was in force at the time), that all entities that distributed Linux/GNU software were required to make their code available. It overrides any commercial license that you are obviously thinking about.
Anyway, I was hoping you'd learn a thing or two in the ~20 years-ish since the OS wars. I am disappointed that you have not.
You’re being dishonest, bearing false witness on Red Hat’s historical business practices. The only completely free “code” they made available was uncompiled, which is completely impractical, for anyone to compile that code for each individual file on their own, and have a working O/S.
That’s exactly why CentOS was created, as you and anyone with any real knowledge on this subject would know - because you could NOT legally download the Red Hat O/S files without a support agreement. The most RH offered was a 30 day trial for free.
There’s countless articles out there like this one that are exposing what you are trying to cover up. Maybe you or a company you worked for had some special arrangement, but the average person had to pay to download and use Rad Hat for more than 30 days. Even now the terms of use are extremely limited.
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/red-hat-31/want-to-download-rhel-5-a-624311/
https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/where-do-i-download-red-hat-enterprise-linux/
https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/where-to-get-redhat-enterprise-linux-installation-number/
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/red-hat-31/how-to-download-rhel-4-ws-337281/
https://superuser.com/questions/15602/is-there-a-free-as-in-money-version-of-redhat-linux
Etc…
Despite many fond memories of Win 7 Pro and my attempts using “Never 10” software to avoid upgrading... I find that when I use it now in virtual machines that I often end up frustrated. This is mostly because of its incompatibilities with updated browsers and also third party security software that I use with it. But there is also the lack of features that I have gotten used to that were added in Windows 10.
Depending on the software package, Stacksocial sometimes makes you jump through confusing hoops to get the software properly setup. You have to follow the directions included, but if you don't... customer service is typically responsive and helpful and gets you back on track.
I love a bargain, so I also frequently enjoy the software packages from https://www.humblebundle.com
Typically they are slightly outdated packaged that have been highly discounted when you get a “bundle”. The proceeds often go to some designated charity.
Of course there is also https://www.kinguin.net
But with some of their “merchants” you often are descending into a bit of a gray area. Although, I personally have never been burned by them; you need to be more careful. Software is often not sold for the same price in different parts of the world. For example, with Kinguin you might be purchasing an English version of software is being sold in Pakistan. So, there may be a few additional hoops to jump through and whether or not your license is really compliant with the Terms of Service may be a bit questionable.
Yeah, it’s the dishonesty that bothers me the most. How they ll argue over and over that something like Red Hat is completely free, even when they know it truly isn’t, because they know that “free” part is the main selling point to get people interested. But most anything good or worth having has a cost to it. People who focus on wanting everything for free usually aren’t on the up and up in many other ways, and like to argue on forums with anyone who they feel represents successful businesses, or capitalism in general. A lot of these guys only post on Linux threads too LOL.
I never liked it or its cumbersome cryptic companion, journald.
My biggest issue with systemd is the fact that it relies so heavily on binary logs and crap like that, which completely breaks the Unix paradigm. Log and configuration files should be human readable. If you want Formatted data that is easily parsed problematically, that is fine, but logs MUST be easily read and understood by human beings. You should be able to use all the standard text processing tools like grep,sed, and awk against them. If you can't grep for a regex, your logging is absolutely broken.
Similarly, you should be able to walk through your init and determine exactly the order everything should start in. I generally find systemd to be opaque and generally a mess to walk through.
First--I don't lie. I tell the truth as much as I am able.
Second, all of your links refer to opinions of people, who likely never researched the topic well enough. Red Hat did make the downloads difficult, and hid the links pretty well--but they were there.
Third, you are the one being dishonest--or at least disingenuous. The earliest link you listed was 2005--less than 20 years ago. By that time, I was already on Fedora full time. I will amend my statement, though, to about ~25ish years. Getting old sucks, and time moves by quicker than I realize.
Right, LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.