Rust Is Dead to Me

https://gavinhoward.com/2023/04/rust-is-dead-to-me/

by stargrave • 3 years ago

54 78 3 years ago

echelon5• 3 years ago

The Rust Foundation is absolute bonkers and they don't deserve stewardship of the language.

Here's a fantastic video on the controversy: https://youtu.be/gutR_LNoZw0

I can't believe this petty, in-group absurdity. It's Home Owners Association-level bullshit the likes of which I've never seen before in the software community.

They've created thousands of ways you can't create Rust events or even associate yourself with the language. It's 100% exclusionary and seems to go well beyond trademark protection.

The language doesn't belong to them.

I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language".

adastra225• 3 years ago

I'm half minded to fork Rust and call it "Crust" or "Crab Language".

Please do. I'll use it.

lxe• 3 years ago

Why is carrying a firearm such a "hill people choose to die on" item?

lylejantzi3rd2• 3 years ago

This an odd question to ask less than a week after Bob Lee was stabbed to death.

a_bonobo• 3 years ago

Interestingly, if you have a gun, you're more likely to die of homicide https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-...

Quote:

Every time a gun in the home was used in self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

The data does not support that having a gun makes you safer

obarthelemy10• 3 years ago

Also, a hill they're choosing to kill kids on, which bothers me more.

koito17• 3 years ago

Am I the only one that feels a lot of parallels between Rust's trademark policy and Mozilla's trademark policies in general? IIRC the Mozilla Public License is very restrictive on usage of logos, branding, etc. to the point where patching software to run on your OS would violate it[1].

So I am not too surprised by what Rust has been doing. I definitely don't like it, but whatever, there's enough fights out there to choose from, and Rust's trademark policy is not one I'm picking.

[1] https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86

Brian_K_White9• 3 years ago

Mozilla isn't a language. Rust isn't an application.

arp242• 3 years ago

Pale Moon has no relation to Mozilla at all; other than being a fork of Firefox of course. It's a pretty small niche project, and I found the Pale Moon people in general to be rather, ehm, off-putting, to put it nicely, and that Tobin guy who created the issue particularly unpleasant (IIRC he managed to get banned from Pale Moon).

Either way, I think the situations are a bit different; naming libraries "$langname-foo" or variations thereof is common in many languages; and I don't think anyone is really confused by this. Attempting to ban the usage of $langname in package and domain names is unheard of AFAIK. Ruby on Rails, godoc.org, gobyexample.com, and many others would be disallowed under this policy.

And as much as I disagree with the author's stance on guns, putting it in a Trademark policy seems ... weird.

dpecos• 3 years ago

Honestly, if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it.

If it’s a dangerous place, why do you even go? And if it’s not, why the hell would you even need an firearm?

I don’t care if you have a permit or not, just the mentality of “I’m going to defend my wife and myself” sounds nuts to anyone not in the states.

IMHO that was the only statement from the rust foundation that I could relate to: it makes feel safer knowing that people like you won’t be able to bring guns to these events.

echelon5• 3 years ago

if you think it’s weird not to allow you to have your firearm in a conference, I think you should think twice about it.

This means you can't legally have a conference in the state of Georgia on any public property (including universities). The state of Georgia requires venue and event organizers to allow firearms in public, state owned, or university locations.

We recently had Music Midtown, one our biggest music festivals with decades of rich history and major headliners, permanently shutter because they tried to prohibit guns and got sued.

These rules have unintended consequences. It's cute to try to be political, but this just excludes people.

adastra225• 3 years ago

Duly noted. I won't ever host any conference on public property in Georgia.

If you want to bring a weapon to my conference, you are not welcome.

obarthelemy10• 3 years ago

So, people who don't want guns around them, kids, drunks, are the ones at fault ?

adastra225• 3 years ago

I don’t care if you have a permit or not, just the mentality of “I’m going to defend my wife and myself” sounds nuts to anyone not in the states.

Sounds absolutely batshit insane to many of us in the states too.

Brian_K_White9• 3 years ago

It does, but that's almost an irrelevant distraction from the consistent theme of Rust demanding things he asserts they have no right to. That is the point being made, not anything about guns.

In almost every example here you could decide that what Rust is saying is not unreasonable.

But in almost every case you could just as easily come to the conclusion he does, because his logic does hold.

(I don't mean the defend my wife & kids from terrorists at the software conference stuff is logical, we can agree that that is goofy, and that any event organizer or property owner probably (not a lawyer) has the same right to say that as they have to say "no shoes no shirt no service". But even then, that right is the event organizer's and the property owners, not the Rust foundation's unless they happen to directly be the one's throwing the event.

I would say what Rust is trying to do is more normal than reasonable. It's not uncommon at all, but that doesn't absolve it of critique.

And his point about intent is valid. The fact it's a draft and the purpose of a draft is exactly to discover objections like these, and may be revised before it's ratified, doesn't change what they want, which tells you the direction of all future updates, and the bias when judging any disputes.

Without that one wacky element which has nothing to do with Rust anyway (any more than any other wacky belief like in gods), I see no problem with this assertion of the character of whoever contributed to and approves of this draft, based on this consistently themed collection of points.

Tommstein2• 3 years ago

If it’s a dangerous place, why do you even go? And if it’s not, why the bell would you need an firearm?

Have you considered the non-black-and-white possibility that it's unknown whether danger will present itself at the conference? No one ever went to a school or just about anywhere else outside a war zone expecting to get shot up or otherwise attacked and possibly murdered, and yet . . . .

obarthelemy10• 3 years ago

The danger is well known, not unknown: it's people with guns.

thiht3• 3 years ago

There's no way in hell I'd ever go to an event where people are allowed to carry firearms. What the fuck? People with guns make any place unsafe, not safer.

pseudo03• 3 years ago

That's cool, you don't have to attend. The weird part is having a long list of intrusive requirements for even just running a small meetup that uses the Rust trademark. Same with the bizarre swag rules and code of conduct requirement. The Rust Foundation should respect diversity and let organizers set rules appropriate for their local culture and environment, rather than trying to prescribe one size fits all policies by using trademark law as a bludgeon.

Brian_K_White9• 3 years ago

Uninteresting, but irrellevant, because what does that have to do with copyrighting a trademark?

realitysballs2• 3 years ago

I’m an American and I think we should revoke the 2nd amendment. Who wants to live in a guns first society?

readthenotes12• 3 years ago

certainly not any tyrant!

yongjik• 3 years ago

Why would you think that? Tyrants love gullible people with guns. Stir up the trouble, dispose of opponents while keeping your hands clean, make people cry for law and order (so that you can enter the stage as their savior), and when all is said and done, send them to gulag or something.

obarthelemy10• 3 years ago

Don't revoke it, just apply it: "well-regulated militia". Regulate, then !

polotics2• 3 years ago

Totally agree. Anyone who wants to carry should by virtue of the 2nd amendment, commit to at least one weekly all-day all-night training in the militia training center of their state. This is how I understand the meaning of the amendment. Also make yourself available for militia work as needed by your state on ~15 minutes notice

falcolas3• 3 years ago

As someone who lives around bears, mountain lions, and wolves (in the US), guns are a reasonable thing to have available. I’ve personally run across all three of those without leaving my local urban area.

Mind you, I’m thinking of hunting rifles and revolvers generally, not assault rifles.

realitysballs2• 3 years ago

What is more dangerous, a random stranger with a gun or a bear? Can you conceive of a way to live in proximity to these animals without a firearm? Would our country be better off if the average citizen did not have such easy access to guns & ammunition?

midoridensha• 3 years ago

Who wants to live in a guns first society?

Roughly half the voters in America, which is why it's not going to change any time soon.

jhanschoo2• 3 years ago

Rust Is Dead to Me

Related Stories