Matthew Garrett ([personal profile] mjg59) wrote2014-10-02 09:20 am
Entry tags:

Actions have consequences (or: why I'm not fixing Intel's bugs any more)

Edit: About two months after this was written, Intel committed to a large scale diversity initiative. Actions speak louder than words, and this was an effective repudiation of the behaviour described below. I've happily worked on Intel-related issues since then.

A lot of the kernel work I've ended up doing has involved dealing with bugs on Intel-based systems - figuring out interactions between their hardware and firmware, reverse engineering features that they refuse to document, improving their power management support, handling platform integration stuff for their GPUs and so on. Some of this I've been paid for, but a bunch has been unpaid work in my spare time[1].

Recently, as part of the anti-women #GamerGate campaign[2], a set of awful humans convinced Intel to terminate an advertising campaign because the site hosting the campaign had dared to suggest that the sexism present throughout the gaming industry might be a problem. Despite being awful humans, it is absolutely their right to request that a company choose to spend its money in a different way. And despite it being a dreadful decision, Intel is obviously entitled to spend their money as they wish. But I'm also free to spend my unpaid spare time as I wish, and I no longer wish to spend it doing unpaid work to enable an abhorrently-behaving company to sell more hardware. I won't be working on any Intel-specific bugs. I won't be reverse engineering any Intel-based features[3]. If the backlight on your laptop with an Intel GPU doesn't work, the number of fucks I'll be giving will fail to register on even the most sensitive measuring device.

On the plus side, this is probably going to significantly reduce my gin consumption.

[1] In the spirit of full disclosure: in some cases this has resulted in me being sent laptops in order to figure stuff out, and I was not always asked to return those laptops. My current laptop was purchased by me.

[2] I appreciate that there are some people involved in this campaign who earnestly believe that they are working to improve the state of professional ethics in games media. That is a worthy goal! But you're allying yourself to a cause that disproportionately attacks women while ignoring almost every other conflict of interest in the industry. If this is what you care about, find a new way to do it - and perhaps deal with the rather more obvious cases involving giant corporations, rather than obsessing over indie developers.

For avoidance of doubt, any comments arguing this point will be replaced with the phrase "Fart fart fart".

[3] Except for the purposes of finding entertaining security bugs

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 03:58 am (UTC)(link)
Hah, is this guy for real? Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Re: Well good riddance!

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:05 am (UTC)(link)
I believe that's what they call a straw man argument.

Re: Confused now.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:07 am (UTC)(link)
It's definitely a sketchy issue to piece together.
On the subject of neutrality and keeping from picking a side, there ARE a few who take no side and pick through everything that's happened for a long-but-raw description of events (mostly to let the events speak for themselves). If you have the time, take a looksee-- might not be worth changing an opinion over, but certainly an interesting read.

This one scorns everyone involved (regardless of side) and focuses exclusively on the mechanics behind some of the arguments. A bit long, and prone to self-referencing related articles, but nice in its own way:
http://mitrailleuse.net/2014/09/19/intellectual-bullying/

This one's a bit shorter, and ends a bit biased, but has some good points regarding how the issue can relate to politics (it makes sense in the context the article uses for the word) and political bias:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/25/gamergate-an-issue-with-2-sides/

Don't give up do easily

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:09 am (UTC)(link)
Imagine if someone supporting GamerGate would be fired from their job because they support GamerGate. That would make you happy, right?

Well, you know that happiness in seeing others suffer -- that's kind of how you're making the supporters of GamerGate feel. Someone will take your place, someone who you will perceive to be without principles.

Wouldn't it be better to keep doing what you're doing, but use your position to inform people about how evil Intel are? I mean, there are quite a bit of snarky messages in the kernel code already, some more wouldn't hurt. :)

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:19 am (UTC)(link)
oh dear Matt, I'm way too late to comment, You should have waited a few days to calm down before posting this; now it's too late, the world has seen it.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:39 am (UTC)(link)
Well, that's some beautiful irony.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:49 am (UTC)(link)
"We don't need any more of this white knight political bullshit in the community. It's completely counterproductive to the goal of getting actual work done."

It is counterproductive to you because you don't acknowledge the problem. If you were harassed and mistreated you wouldn't be so productive would you?

Bravo

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 04:52 am (UTC)(link)
I have to say, you article is quite illuminating, and I would have to agree, this does seem like typical right wing hooey aimed at one or a few indie developers in attempt to mask a larger issue. Standard tactic.

When one says it is the end of gamers they do not mean literaly, they mean the definition is changing, broadening, and different than what is originally meant.

Also, I respect you descision to not work on Intel products, but I fear it is a bit misguided. For instance, if you parents are complete assholes(and I mean think the worse), does that mean you should no longer function in society? So intel are thoe asshole parents but their offspring need to be operational(and removed from their parents clutches). It might be the only option some poor kid has that can't afford the latest windows. At least you were hacking their hardware and doing things they never intended.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 05:21 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 05:56 am (UTC)(link)
Just another white knight neckbeard, hoping his "feminist" views will get him laid.

thank you - for your decision and your ban hammering

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 05:59 am (UTC)(link)
Can't remember my LJ OpenID URL to authenticate but I'm marypcb over there. And I just had to thank you, not just for your principled stand, but for the ONLY comment thread on a topic of this kind that I've been able to read without reminding myself of Lewis's Law (the comments about any article on feminism recapitulates the reasons we need feminism).

I'm a (female) technology journalist and yes, I talk to other journalists about what we all cover. It's not corruption; it's peer networking.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 06:35 am (UTC)(link)
Of course, an SJW publication wouldn't be complete without censoring dissenting comments.

don't be sad

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 06:41 am (UTC)(link)
Have something useful to contribute to the discussion. Spouting stupid stuff isn't a discussion.

Thank you

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 07:02 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you for all your hard work.
While I don't share your beliefs (I do think that feminism is hindering womens, not helping them) I greatly appreciate that you are able respect your ideals more than money.
Thank you for your example.

w

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 07:07 am (UTC)(link)
wut

other architectures?

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 07:29 am (UTC)(link)
First of all, good on you! You have followed what you feel is the high road here, and you chose to work on stuff that aligns with your values. You seem to consistently hold your values up above all else, and that is admirable. How does this impact your view of Linux on ARM, or other architectures? Will you choose to abandon X86_68 entirely, or stop working on thing Intel related? Where do you draw the line? What will you be working on?

Do you feel that Intel might simply be staying away from controversy, no matter what side their advertising money went? If no, do you feel they were taking sides on the issue, and if so why? Does lack of advertising money for what you perceive good conflate to opposition?

Good

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 07:37 am (UTC)(link)
You're a terrible coder anyway, and I've personally hear Linus mock your shitty code. Thanks for holding Linux back for years with your terrible Intel support, Windows has had no issues.

sudo pacman -Rnscu faggot

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 07:37 am (UTC)(link)
lmao fuck off retard

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 08:10 am (UTC)(link)
Self-awareness levels reaching critical lows, cap'n.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 08:15 am (UTC)(link)
The joke





You

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 08:50 am (UTC)(link)
I own an Intel-powered laptop.
Thank you for your integrity.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 09:54 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you for removing yourself from the dev chain. You have no idea what you're talking about when it comes down to sexism, nor do you seem professional enough to truly provide anyone with anything worthy of use. Have a nice day, or not.

Censorship?

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 10:01 am (UTC)(link)
http://xkcd.com/1357/

Woo, so glad this nonsense has seeped into other facets of my life

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 10:18 am (UTC)(link)
So so cool that a bunch of knuckle dragging neanderthals have now jeopardized the stability of my operating system over such an "important" issue. I honestly wish both sides of this gamergate exercise in stupidity would go back to the comments section of Gawker media and leave the rest of us out of it.

Intel's point of view

(Anonymous) 2014-10-03 10:20 am (UTC)(link)
From Leigh's article:
"“Gamer” isn’t just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use. Gamers are over. That’s why they’re so mad.

These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers -- they are not my audience. They don’t have to be yours. There is no ‘side’ to be on, there is no ‘debate’ to be had. "


Let's imagine you are Intel and you're in a advertisement partnership with a website in hope of reaching your clients, the gamers. Then this website publishes an article where it attacks the people you are trying to reach, and it does so in a very unprofessional way. The attack gains even larger publicity when other major websites publish practically identical articles within a day. Joint attack increases distrust towards game media and all criticism of cliquishness or collusion is swiftly ignored or silenced by the same media organizations. This creates a Streisand effect which feeds even more to the publicity.

Now if you're Intel you really don't have to think about which side gets more death threats on twitter or who is morally more bankrupt, a cheating girlfriend or her vengeful boyfriend. They don't really have to think if sexy women in video games are a problem or not. Intel makes hardware and they are not giving financial support to loud people on twitter, but they sure can care about how professionally their advertisement partners' employees handle their jobs.

Page 9 of 14