While I think you've also been bitten by the "we accept everyone! (who thinks the way we do)" crowd as well, this is not the place or the way to express that frustration.
Not any serious people, so why do we care?
From what I've gathered the findings are based on real data.
Citation? Sounds interesting.
I tend not to take my own mistakes very seriously unless they come with serious consequences. Having someone I respect tear into me would, I think, force me to take greater care and apply more attention to my work than I already do.
I've heard similar anecdotes from people who have contributed. I even recall a female contributor say something positive about it.
If anything you'd have trouble getting code in because maintainer thinks it would add more complexity than is necessary, or would make his job harder in the future, or after writing and testing the code, you'd find out you should have been doing things differently, etc. These are much more probable ways to get discouraged from contributing kernel code.
There's a high bar to getting code in, and that can be frustrating. But it also keeps the mainline attractive to users and developers, because of ever improving code quality.
"What the fuck is this? This came from Satan's butt-hole. Kill whoever did this - kill them immediately, here, I'll go and find this asshole who submitted this patch, and do it for you, you lazy ingrates, why do I have to do everything around here?"
It's clearly putting additional pressure on Intel. How you feel about that depends on how you feel about them furiously trying to sweep everything under the carpet and hoping nobody notices.
Personally I think his humiliation of Intel here is putting necessary pressure on them. If he couched his terms and tried to be "nice" about this they wouldn't feel nearly the same pressure.
I wasn't even saying that his tone on this particular instance was excessive. I was responding to the general accusation that "PC culture will silence him". There's exactly one sentence I have issues with here ("the whole hardware interface is literally mis-designed by morons"). The rest of the email is toeing the line, but manages to be forceful without being outright insulting.
I don't. This is pretty much part of his brand. He's developed a reputation for flipping his lid and lambasting people who have always deserved it using entertainingly colorful language. That's why these rants still get to the top of HN.
>I was responding to the general accusation that "PC culture will silence him".
I mean, that seems to be what you're trying to do by demanding that he water his language down to something that has minimal emotional impact.
It's not like using the word morons is particularly offensive, either - except to the people who actually deserved it (Intel).
>There's exactly one sentence I have issues with here ("the whole hardware interface is literally mis-designed by morons").
Which is the sentence that got this rant on hacker news, which attracted all the attention which is necessary in order to put pressure on Intel to fix their shit.
And yet the title of the submission is "Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons". That's a good suggestion that the moron quote is not "what got this rant on hacker news". Perhaps it's on hacker news not because the form is inflammatory, but because the content is insightful.
Maybe—just maybe—the fact that the Linux project lead publicly accused Intel of not having their shit together is newsworthy and would end up on the front page of Hacker News no matter what tone it was written in, because that is newsworthy enough in and of itself.
Damn you, Wintel!
It's a sad thing to say about the state of the human specie.
The same can be said of free speech.