I’m not trying to attack him, but this is pretty funny.

Context: 11 days ago DT released a video where he called out the people who refer to Linux distributions as “Linux” as opposed to “GNU/Linux”. Today he released a video where he did exactly that.

  • Marduk73@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good catch and funny. I mean people still say Xerox something when they’re going to use a non xerox copier. But we all know what we mean.

    • bisby@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Indeed. “Linux” now means “literally Linux, the kernel” and also “an operating system that uses Linux as the kernel”. Kind of like how people say they use “Windows” but they mean that they use “Windows 11”.

      The only reason saying “GNU/Linux” helps is if you want to give credit to GNU. It doesn’t add clarity to anything. Which is warranted, but also, what if I forked GNU and relabeled it as linux-tools. I believe that’s within my right, isn’t it? To fork and copy things.

      It’s kinda odd to be like “copyright is bad, the works should be free, and just pass around naturally!” … “but also make sure I get credit”

      • digital_alchemist@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve come to realize that semantics are vastly more important than many of us realize.

        Saying GNU/Linux isn’t about giving credit to the GNU Project so much as it is about spreading the message that GNU represents. GNU represents a cooperative, collaborative philosophy diametrically opposed to the oppressive, exploitative capitalist ideals championed by today’s ruling class. By using “GNU” we remind users that the freedom we enjoy with our computing today was made possible, not by a kernel, but by the ideals of community and camaraderie embedded into our software by way of the GPL.

        I don’t see anything antithetical about anyone wanting to share their work while at the same time wanting to be credited for it. On the contrary, most copyright regimes have specific carve outs for moral rights such as attribution. Even the most liberal of the creative commons license options includes an attribution requirement. That said, it isn’t just within your right to rename things you fork, it may be a requirement. For reference just think back to the controversy surrounding IceWeasel.

  • Hextic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The whole GNU thing has always came off as butthurt from RMS since Linux got all the glory while he and his team of contributors shit the bed on the Hurd kernel.

    Let’s not forget that X.org + all the desktop environments which are very important parts of a functioning OS are not GNU projects either. At what point do we need to say GNU+X11+KDE+Linux?

    All I know is if you say that machine over there runs Linux, I know what you’re talking about.