All people definitely can do this. They just choose not to.

I won't say that I always do, but I try to keep it mind. Its a lesson I really try to internalize.

Try this thought experiment. Let's say I show up at your office with a duffel bag filled with $1M cash ... and I said to you, snowwrestler 'I'm now going to make a bunch of nasty and insulting comments to you ... if you can laugh it off with a smile you get this giant bag of cash', I suspect you could find it in you to absolutely ignore everything I said and happily focus on the giant bag of cash sitting in front of you.

Wrong. The classic demonstration is Phineas Gage. A man who by all accounts had very good self-control until the day that an accident drove a railroad spike through his brain, taking out the frontal lobe that is responsible for said control. After that he lost control. Not through lack of will, but because of physical trauma. The same phenomena has been observed in lots of stroke victims.

Moving on, there are a ton of psychiatric conditions which are not even that rare that result in people who have hardwired reactions to words that are out of their conscious control. PTSD. Social anxiety. Manic-depression (at either extreme). And so on. These days we can map out how words get processed and see the short circuit that keeps the frontal lobe out of the loop. It isn't a question of willpower. We know how to treat these conditions and help people regain control. We don't do it by telling people to "try harder".

What about normal people? Well it has long been known that any normal person in the grip of strong emotion also loses control. It doesn't matter why they have the strong emotion - someone died, you were in a fight, etc - once you feel the emotion, you have no control. Furthermore every time we go through this pattern, we wind up laying a path that makes it easier to go through the pattern.

Afterwards it is easy for people to go through a thought experiment. Say, "I should have done this, said that, held my temper." Blame themselves. Promise they will do better But guess what? They are wrong. Next time they don't do better. Not because of lack of willpower (though that may be an issue), but because human brains don't work in the way we consciously think they work.

But note this is not just defeatism. Because it turns out that we can understand these classic patterns we have. And with understanding comes the ability to get better control. But not through having an iron will. Instead through having the self-awareness to know, "When I feel this and hold it in like that the next thing I know I lose control. So I need to pay attention to this early sign and walk away for 10 minutes, then come back and continue."

Edit to add: So because it's so well-compensated, I don't think that's a good example of equanimity. Equanimity means remaining calm and pleasant even when I'm not being paid--or if I'm being asked to pay.

And for those of us on the outside, we wouldn't tell a random developer that he should crank out 40 push-ups to prove his worth, like we might in the military. In the military there is what we'd call a bona-fide occupational qualification behind assessing the psychological durability of recruits.

Is there such as bona-fide requirement to develop software patches? Should there be?

I'll give Linus a pass on this much; his behavior here is well within the norms of the Linux kernel development community and his own previous behavior. He's the Captain of that particular ship and he's not doing anything illegal, nor does he intend personal injury, so at some point it's easier to concede that he will run that ship the way he wants and put on asbestos underwear, than to try to change both his behavior and the resultant mailing list culture.

But I think it's important to keep in mind that his kind of behavior must be very much the exception to the rule for software development, open or otherwise. If you breed a culture of aggressiveness then you must be ready to handle the people you draw in from that. It works for the military, it seems to work for the LKML, but I would be hesitant to hold it up as a general model.

And the military doesn't breed "aggressiveness" outside of specific services and roles that require it. It does demand an inordinate "attention to detail" due to the fact lives are on the line, whether that be on ships, planes or just normal activities.

This "attention to detail" is also seen among other professions, but seldom in software outside of NASA/avionics/medical/etc...

Linus has laid out guidelines and expectations which while demanding, can be followed. If you can't test your code nor follow a checklist, then maybe you shouldn't submit patches to him. It's the military equivalent of passing barracks/quarters inspections, it should be elementary for professionals.

Don't make it a strawman, as if the only alternative to treating each others like assholes is to be passive-aggressive backstabbers. Even the military has those, the Navy calls them SWOs :P.

Even Linus doesn't make that claim directly, instead he says that the other cultures you might try to enforce lead eventually to the culture of PC passive-aggressive backstabbing, not that those are the only two options.

I do agree that the Linux kernel has a much higher need for attention to detail than many other user-space projects. But I don't think every such detail-oriented project necessarily requires this type of culture. How is the environment developing SQLite, or Postgres?

And even if we say detail-oriented projects need alpha personalities to enforce these checklists, where does that leave the majority of open-source development?