The thing that people do not seem to realize is that Linux is big business mostly funded by major corporations and government entities. The myth of excentric computer nerd do-gooders donating their time and efforts to help others by perfecting the Linux Kernal or one of the many distributions would be funny if it were not so pervasive.
"By 2017 "Linux ran on 90% of the public cloud workloads and nine of the top 10 public cloud providers. On top of these, Linux also ran on 82% of the world’s smartphones and had a gargantuan market share of 99% on the supercomputer market."
https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/cybercrime-and-digital-threats/a-look-at-linux-threats-risks-and-recommendations.
Since that time Linux distributions and the kernel(s) itself have grown and further dominated much of the segments that they are focused on. It is just much fuzzier than that of most of the major entities that are the major contributors.
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.
Most if not all of the major Linux distributions have major multi-national corporations behind them. Who are you trusting your data with and who else might be contributing and exploiting vulnerabilities. This is a discussion that most people have little if any awareness of.
I will close with a link to this article that makes a few good points.
https://thenewstack.io/is-community-backed-open-source-software-worth-the-risk/
https://thenewstack.io/is-community-backed-open-source-software-worth-the-risk/
I always thought it strange that Linux developers were so proud that the “kernel” had grown into the size of a cornfield. I imagine somewhere in there are both the code to handle a defunct dot matrix printer and a backdoor to the NSA.
I always feel bad when I forget to ping you into any thread that I start here related to computers. This one and the motivation for it are probably too arcane to get much attention.
Nevertheless there is a huge difference in principle between open source and closed source software, which is whether third parties can or can not independently assess the software for vulnerabilities. With closed-source software one has no idea what it’s actually doing, and one has to trust the skills of the same developers who developed the vulnerabilities to also fix them, which brings to mind the quote that “problems can’t be solved by the same minds that created those problems”. With open source software anyone in the world is able to submit a patch to any given identified problem.
Ping!.....
“The power of collaboration is greater when many different perspectives are included.”
Conservatives need not apply, though.
See, I did not say anything about the competing operating systems. :)
The various flavors of Linux don’t use their own version of the kernel. They write all the other stuff around it. The kernel is maintained by the LF and the code that goes into the kernel is heavily peer reviewed with Torvalds himself approving the code.
“The Linux Foundation provides free training to women and underrepresented communities “
Does that include the under 85 IQ community?
What about the felon community?
Or the pedophile community?
Wow. I didn’t know foundations could write suicide notes.
Don't like Linux Foundation? Don't buy their cruddy courses then, but that has nothing to do with what is you run.
DEI is always a loser. When you hire based on skin color or race, you cheapen the product. You make the product less than it can be.
Companies should be color blind when hiring the best person for the job. DEI hires are almost always the worst possible person for that job.
Barack Hussein Obama is a perfect example.
Linux is/was a scam method to facilitate technology transfers to foreign governments and companies, that succeeded greatly in that purpose. The arguments about it here on FR back 20:years ago were endless, but are over now. The plot was fully exposed when International Business Machines went ahead and bought Red Hat and simultaneously announced they have many more employees working outside the US than within.
If their ideas and contributions were any good they would already be included
I played a game called SWGLegends they just started Inclusion in the Force ,LOL
There are roughly 400 flavors of Linux, 600 if you count the abandoned ones. That’s almost enough for every gender to have a flavor of their own, so I don’t know how much more diverse you possibly could get.
Whatever. At least I’m not paying for it. Haven’t paid a penny for an OS in 20 years.
Looks like your thread called the Brass Buzzard out of retirement from polluting Linux threads. That does no bode well of future such threads on FR