- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
- linux@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
- linux@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/62192988
The latest changes implemented in the Systemd repo, related to or prompted by age-verification laws, have made many people unhappy (I suppose links about this aren’t necessary). This has led to a surge in Systemd forks during the last days (“surge” because there have always been plenty of forks). Here are some forks that explicitly mention those changes as their reason for forking (rough time ordering taken from the fork page):
paramazo/systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager without age verification”
ganitam/systemd “Systemd fork just before the Age Verification addition. Hoping more capable developers and maintainers do same…”
GSYT-Productions/systemd-fork “The systemd System and Service Manager, without the stupid Age Verification”
speedythesnail/unre tarded-systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager, without the r e t arded age-verification commits”
ta13579/systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager WITHOUT THE FUCKING AGE CHECKS”
r4shsec/systemd-no-age-verification “This is systemd but without the age verification made via pull request https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40978”
Pingasmaster/fightthesystemd “Systemd without the nonsense: no age verification, no lighthouse built-in.”
Jeffrey-Sardina/system “Liberated systemd – no surveillance. Ever.”
HaplessIdiot/systemd-saneagecheck “The systemd System and Service Manager with age verification bypass and polling rate options for said feature”
Queer-Coded-LGBTQ/systemd-fuck-california “The systemd System and Service Manager, but without age bs added in.”
Codiak540/unshitted-systemd “A fork of systemd aiming to strip the Age verification. Sue me california.”
Hopefully the energy of this reaction won’t be scattered among too many alternatives, although some amount of scattering is always good.
Evidently not, as shown by all the forks.
You’re confusing blind reactionary panic with controversy. But hey, it’s your chance to prove me wrong. Tell me what the controversial change was. And why a completely optional text field with no check or enforcement or any system behind it is controversial. Do you even know anything about the subsystem being discussed? Because if you did all the outrage is absurd.
I would say that if it causes a controversy then it is controversial, even if some people think it shouldn’t be.
Oh, I got you now. You’re one of those people that thinks vaccines are controversial. Because a bunch of uninformed or misinformed people have bad opinions on the subject. And if you’re not. That’s worse because you can’t be bothered to have any consistency lol.
There’s a difference between a controversy or conspiracy, existing around something. And that thing being controversial itself. And I’m going to get a lot of downvotes for pointing that out. But I’m not even mad. It’s absolutely true and hilarious to watch all the uninformed reactionary downvoting.
BTW dawg. Got bad news. All Unix’s have been similarly doxing us likely longer than you’ve been alive!!! With completely optional, unenforced, and voluntary fields for such sensitive information as real-name address and even date of birth. Dun dun dun!!! Not even that recent unearthed tape of bell labs sysIV was clean! Unix is a voluntary CIA psyop confirmed! Welp better go harass volunteer projects and devs who are also victims of these failing states. That will fix it if anything will. Because if there’s one thing we all know for a fact. Ignorant reactionary mobs are never wrong.
So I guess you’re saying you use “controversial” in a normative sense while I’m using it in a descriptive sense. We’re talking at slightly cross purposes. Maybe in itself this shouldn’t be controversial, but the political context in which it appears makes people worry.