they’ve said “we speak for the widest used extended user service in linux”… because… that’s what they are
to say they “speak for the distros” is ridiculous: in that case, every time they merge a feature they “speak for the distros”… they speak for their own software, which is implemented by distros precisely because they implement things like this
Then the whole premise of systemd is absurd if it does talk for distros (OSes). When I get NixOS, I don’t install it because it has systemd. I install it because it is built around Nix. SystemD is a freaking fire-and-forget-style convenience and that’s it. When I look at specific features I want or don’t want, the first thing I’m considering is not necessarily the init system, I first look at what sort of computer I want, then I think about the OS, and specific programs like Konsole last.
I do not want a stupid init system, in this case an init system bundled in a suite(!), taking the steering wheel like this. I definitely don’t want this happening in highly politicised contexts like this one. A layer of perversion is added when you take into account that there are hardly any places to evade these big changes as systemd is omnipresent.
SystemD making these big political statements and practical decisions is just as absurd as GNOME or Xorg doing them. Fuck that shit.
you install a distro because of all the software it includes and how they interact out of the box
you’re completely right that systemd is a background service that most people don’t care about, but it does make the whole system more reliable, and much easier to administer for servers or workstations (enterprise management; not personal)
you certainly do want an init system… even sysv-init is an init system: you need something that runs as pid 1 that triggers other services. systemd starts services, and also ensures they’re in the correct security contexts, running as the correct users, makes sure they’re healthy, tracks dependencies (not just order; this speeds things up because it can be parallel, ensures failures don’t cascade, and means there’s far less jank in random bash scripts)
this isn’t a big political statement: this is an acknowledgment that linux users - not all, but some - will want/require something like this… and systemd user database is the place where that information is stored on modern linux systems
What they’ve done, is in the user info field (which already has a ton of information that almost nobody ever fills out) they added a date of birth field. They do not control what it’s used for, who’s going to use it, or if the user will ever bother filling it out. Perhaps nobody will ever implement a use for it, it’s really nothing.
Context matters. Systemd did this as a reaction to frankly insane laws. They didn’t have to do anything like this, yet they did and comparing this to changing and creating files manually in vim misses the point entirely. Intentionally doing something is very different from a feature being natively present.
YOU control what info goes there, if any. It mandates NOTHING.
Until closed source or even open source programs demand an ID verified age from the OS. When that happens you are forced to unmask yourself and the systemd shit is the first step to making such an API possible. It normalizes genuinely insane demands that add nothing for the users except compliance.
This is pretty key. If they had added this field 8 years ago, absent any context of swarms of lawmakers salivating for personal info so they can find more children to fuck, or data to sell to their donors, then I wouldn’t have thought much of it. The timing is absolutely a critical element of the discussion. Heck, wait until CA has repealed its law, and admitted in embarrassment it was a terrible implementation of child protection, and maybe I’d even be okay with adding the field.
Putting it in now is very much like the nazi standing at your door, holding a hand close to your knob, insisting “I’m not actually searching your house and breaking your 4th amendment rights! I’m just standing here, for no particular reason!”
Obviously not, that would be something very very different than what they’ve done.
What systemd has done is the following: They went “we speak for the distros utilizing our program now”
they’ve said “we speak for the widest used extended user service in linux”… because… that’s what they are
to say they “speak for the distros” is ridiculous: in that case, every time they merge a feature they “speak for the distros”… they speak for their own software, which is implemented by distros precisely because they implement things like this
Then the whole premise of systemd is absurd if it does talk for distros (OSes). When I get NixOS, I don’t install it because it has systemd. I install it because it is built around Nix. SystemD is a freaking fire-and-forget-style convenience and that’s it. When I look at specific features I want or don’t want, the first thing I’m considering is not necessarily the init system, I first look at what sort of computer I want, then I think about the OS, and specific programs like Konsole last.
I do not want a stupid init system, in this case an init system bundled in a suite(!), taking the steering wheel like this. I definitely don’t want this happening in highly politicised contexts like this one. A layer of perversion is added when you take into account that there are hardly any places to evade these big changes as systemd is omnipresent.
SystemD making these big political statements and practical decisions is just as absurd as GNOME or Xorg doing them. Fuck that shit.
you install a distro because of all the software it includes and how they interact out of the box
you’re completely right that systemd is a background service that most people don’t care about, but it does make the whole system more reliable, and much easier to administer for servers or workstations (enterprise management; not personal)
you certainly do want an init system… even sysv-init is an init system: you need something that runs as pid 1 that triggers other services. systemd starts services, and also ensures they’re in the correct security contexts, running as the correct users, makes sure they’re healthy, tracks dependencies (not just order; this speeds things up because it can be parallel, ensures failures don’t cascade, and means there’s far less jank in random bash scripts)
this isn’t a big political statement: this is an acknowledgment that linux users - not all, but some - will want/require something like this… and systemd user database is the place where that information is stored on modern linux systems
What they’ve done, is in the user info field (which already has a ton of information that almost nobody ever fills out) they added a date of birth field. They do not control what it’s used for, who’s going to use it, or if the user will ever bother filling it out. Perhaps nobody will ever implement a use for it, it’s really nothing.
No, what they have done is kowtowing.
What? It’s like saying systemd is handing the government your info because they have a field for your real name and address.
YOU control what info goes there, if any. It mandates NOTHING.
You may as well be mad at vim because your text editor is capable of storing your birthdate if you go in and type it and save it to /public/myInfo.txt
Context matters. Systemd did this as a reaction to frankly insane laws. They didn’t have to do anything like this, yet they did and comparing this to changing and creating files manually in vim misses the point entirely. Intentionally doing something is very different from a feature being natively present.
Until closed source or even open source programs demand an ID verified age from the OS. When that happens you are forced to unmask yourself and the systemd shit is the first step to making such an API possible. It normalizes genuinely insane demands that add nothing for the users except compliance.
This is pretty key. If they had added this field 8 years ago, absent any context of swarms of lawmakers salivating for personal info so they can find more children to fuck, or data to sell to their donors, then I wouldn’t have thought much of it. The timing is absolutely a critical element of the discussion. Heck, wait until CA has repealed its law, and admitted in embarrassment it was a terrible implementation of child protection, and maybe I’d even be okay with adding the field.
Putting it in now is very much like the nazi standing at your door, holding a hand close to your knob, insisting “I’m not actually searching your house and breaking your 4th amendment rights! I’m just standing here, for no particular reason!”
You said it better than I could