Leigh
npub1sgx8...7wnj
4K reachable #Knots nodes.
If you look at Knots purely as a form of protest, it is interesting to note that it’s well understood that physical in-the-streets-protest turnout numbers are a fraction of the underlying public sentiment. Perhaps only a few percent of the whole ever turn up to protest.
🤔
Some of the references:
View quoted note →
Felipe Contreras
Rust doesn’t belong in the Linux kernel; it’s all about ideology
Due to some recent Rust drama in the Linux kernel I’ve decided to explain in detail why the Rust ideology simply isn’t compatible with ...
X (formerly Twitter)
The Lunduke Journal (@LundukeJournal) on X
There are two key reasons why many are forcing Rust re-writes of battle tested software (like sudo and coreutils):
1) To get rid of "undesirable" ...
The Rust Foundation goes to war against people using the word "Rust"
Seriously. The title of this article violates the new Rust Trademark Policy. It's insane.
X (formerly Twitter)
Zach Vorhies / Google Whistleblower (@Perpetualmaniac) on X
For people looking for a conspiracy, the replacement language for C++, Rust, is compromised by a cabal of woke tards that are doing strange things....
I asked Grok “Have any writers discussed how Rust’s adoption in Linux might compromise the project from a political or ideological perspective, particularly regarding “woke” influences, and how this could negatively impact Linux in the long term, beyond technical considerations?”
Grok: “Yes, several writers, bloggers, and commentators have criticized the adoption of Rust in the Linux kernel from a non-technical, political, or ideological angle, often portraying it as a vehicle for “woke” or progressive cultural shifts that could undermine Linux’s traditional ethos long-term by prioritizing identity politics, enforcing new codes of conduct, and sidelining established developers.
One prominent critique comes from software developer Felipe Contreras, who argues that the push for Rust reflects a deeper ideological clash: Rust advocates embody a prescriptive, progressive mindset—akin to “woke” tactics like renaming Git’s “master” branch for social reasons or weaponizing codes of conduct to police language (e.g., reacting to metaphors like “cancer” for Rust integration)—which contrasts with Linux’s pragmatic, live-and-let-live C developer culture, potentially leading to imposed top-down changes and cultural incompatibility that erodes the project’s bottom-up consensus. This view is echoed in follow-up discussions where Rust’s integration is seen as progressive arrogance, unwilling to adapt to Linux’s established ways, risking long-term division.
Tech journalist Bryan Lunduke has repeatedly framed Rust’s rise as politically motivated, suggesting efforts to rewrite core Linux tools in Rust (like sudo) aim to eliminate “undesirable” licenses like the GPL while installing new leadership aligned with cultural changes, such as stricter codes of conduct that force out “old language” programmers deemed insufficiently progressive. He also highlights the Rust Foundation’s trademark policies, which explicitly allow logo modifications for “community movements” like LGBTQIA+ Pride or Black Lives Matter but restrict others, positioning Rust as an overtly political tool that could infuse open-source projects like Linux with biased ideologies, alienating traditional contributors. In another piece, Lunduke satirically notes Linus Torvalds “threatening” to include Rust as punishment, underscoring perceived cultural overreach.
A YouTube video titled “The Rust Programming Language Is A Political Trojan Horse” explicitly calls Rust a means for “Marxists to subvert the establishment and overthrow institutions,” citing the Rust Core Team’s statements that “tech is and always will be political” and their support for Black Lives Matter as evidence of embedded “woke” agendas that could infiltrate projects like Linux, leading to long-term institutional capture. Similar sentiments appear in forum discussions, where commenters accuse the Rust community of injecting “woke identity politics” into kernel development, likening resistance to racism and warning that such advocates will cause “chaos and destruction” by making debates about social issues rather than code. One poster describes it as “religious bigotry,” implying dogmatic progressivism.
On social media and hacker forums, figures like Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies have claimed Rust is “compromised by a cabal of woke tards,” positioning its promotion in Linux (as the only non-C language allowed) as a potential plot to shift mission-critical code under ideologically aligned control. Others link Rust’s popularity to “millennial frailty” and the “woke movement,” criticizing concepts like language “safety” as softening traditional programming rigor, while noting broader FOSS infiltration by virtue signalers who selectively enforce standards to favor progressive groups. An older Rust user forum thread questions why the language takes political stances, reinforcing views that this could politicize ecosystems like Linux unnecessarily.
Overall, these critiques suggest that Rust’s integration risks long-term harm to Linux by fostering division, cultural gatekeeping, and a shift away from merit-based, apolitical development toward ideologically driven priorities.”
These look good. Interested to hear from anyone that uses them.
“#Framework is the antithesis of #Apple”
https://frame.work
Right click “Save to Birb” coming soon.