Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 8th Jun 2008 15:53 UTC, submitted by sonic2000gr
Legal The story of Hans Reiser, the eccentric file system programmer, is a tragic one. The author of the ReiserFS was arrested under suspicion of the murder of his wife Nina Reiser in 2006, and was declared guilty in April 2008. Some still placed doubts about the conviction, stating that he might be innocent. It now seems that all doubt has been quelled, since Alameda County District Attorney Thomas Orloff has revealed that Hans Reiser will disclose the location of Nina's body for a reduced sentence.
Thread beginning with comment 317725
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Oliver
by Oliver on Sun 8th Jun 2008 16:35 UTC
Oliver
Member since:
2006-07-15

>As my teacher in Dutch Literature always used to say: "Most Dutch writers are assholes, but that doesn't discredit their contributions to the world of literature in any way."

This is a strong pragmatism Thom. But one question without any flame in it: would you use work of Charles Manson or maybe Hitler? Sure it's not really comparable but I do think you know what I'm thinking of. That said, it's hard to work with some stuff and forget about the person behind it. So the code isn't the murderer, but ...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Oliver
by judgen on Sun 8th Jun 2008 16:44 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

Hitler was not an awful writer. The first part of mein kampf is actually quite enjoyable, and it gives insight to where his beliefs came from. You should spend and hour or two reading it.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by javiercero1 on Sun 8th Jun 2008 21:20 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

If you find any portion of Mein Kampf remotely "enjoyable" you have issues.

It is substandard literature written by a frustrated artist with deliriums of grandeur. But then most German literature is boring as f*ck, so he may have not stuck out so bad.

In any case, since Hitler has been named... according to Godwin's law, this discussion is over.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by yahya on Tue 10th Jun 2008 16:54 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
yahya Member since:
2007-03-29

Hitler was not an awful writer. The first part of mein kampf is actually quite enjoyable, and it gives insight to where his beliefs came from. You should spend and hour or two reading it.


Can you specify, what exactly you found "enjoyable"? German is my first language, so I had the chance to read the original. I didn't make it beyond the first two chapters, because the language is just clumsy, awkward and pathetic.

It doesn't even radiate the "evil grandeur" you would expect from it, just his frustration with the Weimar Republic which would deny him due recognition and had taken away the good old order. It lacks any intellectual depths or (evil) beauty.

Hitler may have been a master of mass psychology, think of the well-orchestrated party conventions, but he was an awful writer and an even worse artist.

There is one recording of him in a natural situation, where you here him talking in his normal voice (google for "Mannerheim tapes"), this also shows that he certainly hasn't had the brightest intellect.
Certainly he would have been unable to deliver a work of true art and creativity as a a Linux file system.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by Oliver
by diegocg on Sun 8th Jun 2008 16:48 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

Hitler was vegetarian, he hated tobbaco and alcohol and under his government germans were one of the first countries that had laws that protected animals against experimentation, etc. And I don't think people looks at Greenpeace as a nazi organization.

What stops reiser 4 from getting more attention is mainly reiser4 itself, not Hans. Many people didn't like reiser 4 before Nina's dissapearance, many people don't like it now. Compare it with the excitement that other filesystems have generated - like ZFS.

Edited 2008-06-08 16:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by orfanum on Sun 8th Jun 2008 20:52 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
orfanum Member since:
2006-06-02

Unfortunately, some apparently very respectable academics do make this general comparison (Murray Bookchin, Peter Staudenmaier, Janet Biehl, Frank Uek├Âtter), see:

http://larouchepub.com/other/book_reviews/2007/3415green_n_brown.ht...

for a brief list of some of these arguments regarding 'ecofascism'

Thankfully, a more mature debate is emerging:

http://www.fis-kultur.de/buecher/buchlisten/Die.Eroberung.der.Natur...

You pays your money and takes your choice - some researchers see conservationism, deep ecology, etc. and fascism as anti-modern, and hence from the same intellectual mould, others see Nazism here as as the epitome of instrumental rationalism, the technophile essence of which continues to destroy the natural environment.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Oliver
by dagw on Sun 8th Jun 2008 16:51 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

would you use work of Charles Manson or maybe Hitler?

Except that we do use the work of Hitler, and people worse than him. For example the medical experiments carried out at the Nazi concentration camps where horrendous beyond belief and most of it was simple sadistic torture without any notable scientific validity. Despite this some of the results, like those from their experiments on hypothermia, have been used by doctors around the world to save lives.

Now there are people who argue that this information should never be used, no matter what lives could be saved from it. Anything the Nazis discovered we should rediscover humanely. But it seems most people think that saving lives is of the highest priority even if the knowledge of how to do so came from monsters.

Reply Parent Score: 11

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by Havin_it on Sun 8th Jun 2008 18:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
Havin_it Member since:
2006-03-10

It's a very compelling question. A bit OT (Hans did not commit murder to enhance his filesystem, I,m pretty sure) but certainly an interesting point.

It seems similar to this term I keep hearing on Law and Order, "fruit of the poisoned tree". Evidence of a crime, no matter how conclusive of a defendant's guilt, is not admissible in a trial if it was obtained by illegal means. Or course Sam Waterston & co. will usually find some clever way around this rule, and we'll (or are expected to, I think) applaud them for it.

This behaviour is almost unique because, as you indicate with the Nazi example, we tend to regard knowledge as a Genie that can't be kept in its bottle. We're always told to learn lessons from the Nazi era, so should one be subjective in that enterprise? I'm sure that, if the powers who got hold of those research data had decided to bury them for moral reasons, they would still have leaked eventually.

Of course, turning your nose up at working on (or using) a bit of software because the author--one of the authors, for accuracy--did a Bad Thing is not really comparable to the above. The software still deserves to be evaluated on its own merits. I think, though, that that is exactly what is happening, and the suggestion of unfair prejudice based on Hans's crime is spoken mainly by die-hard fans as an excuse, rather than an objective assessment of any community members' behaviour.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Alwin Member since:
2005-07-17

Let me give you another example. I'm a vegetarian, for several reasons, one of them is the suffering we put animals through. Locked up in small cages for their whole (short) life, then transported across Europe, slaughtered, just to transport the meat back to the country where the animals came from (because slaughterhouses elsewhere do it cheaper).

In general I consider the 'damage done' when the meat is bought. Now if I'm someplace where meat sandwiches are passed around, and there's one or two left over (that will be thrown away), I'm inclined to grab one. Why? Because after you've put those animals through all that suffering, the least you can do, is enjoy the result (I *do* like many meat products, I just don't eat them - normally). If you don't, all that suffering was for nothing.

So if people suffer, but something useful comes out of it, that can save others from going through similar suffering, use it! I'd almost say you owe that to the victims.

As for ReiserFS, I hope people will be sensible enough to separate Hans Reiser's personal troubles from the merits of his filesystem, and decide its use on practical/technical merits alone. However, Hans Reiser's situation can be part of that: if as a lead developer he's unable to contribute any longer, and perhaps nobody else has enough of a grip on the codebase, it would go unmaintained soon. Now that is a practical issue to consider. Let's hope there are enough interested parties, so that a good filesystem doesn't go to waste.

Not that it matters much, perhaps: there's so countless men-hours put into projects that go nowhere anyway, and there are other good filesystems to use with Linux (ext2/3, XFS, etc).

Edited 2008-06-08 23:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by Hakime on Mon 9th Jun 2008 10:35 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
Hakime Member since:
2005-11-16

@diegocg

"Hitler was vegetarian, he hated tobbaco and alcohol and under his government germans were one of the first countries that had laws that protected animals against experimentation, etc. And I don't think people looks at Greenpeace as a nazi organization"

What is going on here? Even though i think that speaking about Hitler has nothing to do with the content of the present news, i feel the need to reply to this king of comment.

Let me ask you something. Have you ever heard that Greenpeace has killed thousand of people just because they were ***? Or have you ever heard that Greenpeace has organized, planed and supported one of the biggest genocide in the history of humanity?

Well i don't think so...

Or maybe it's that you are so f...k uneducated and stupid that you think Hitler was a good guy just because he did not smoke or drink alcohol?

I am amazed to see so much stupidity. How can anyone try to defend Hitler in any way or for any reason? Are you crazy or what?

And also to the people arguing that humanity is using anything that the Hitler regime could have created. You people are insane, you don't know what you are talking about. Go to say this to someone who got his grand father/mother or father/mother or any relative killed in a gas chamber.

Think about it, and stop the bullshit, you are embarrassing the web. Go to school to educate yourself.....

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE: Comment by Oliver
by evert on Sun 8th Jun 2008 17:24 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
evert Member since:
2005-07-06

If you agree with using highways, or building rockets, then you are agreeing with using the heritage of Hitler's Third Reich.

Knowledge, or a filesystem for that matter, must not be valued according to what you think of the originator.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by javiercero1 on Sun 8th Jun 2008 21:23 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

Other people were building rockets before Von Braun, and Germany is not the only country who came up with the concept of multilane driving surfaces.

So what is your point?

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Comment by Oliver
by Moredhas on Mon 9th Jun 2008 05:20 in reply to "RE: Comment by Oliver"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

By that logic, if you backpack across Europe, you agree with the Roman Empire's violent march, and subjugation (or sometimes assimilation) of all cultures in their path, since you'll probably be walking on a Roman Road, or riding a bus on a highway built over a Roman Road. Good can come of almost anything, and to ignore anything good because of it's source is a waste. That can come out as "the ends justify the means", but that's a bit of an oversimplification. Roads weren't Rome's sole intention, they were a means to improve trade and troop transport through conquered regions. "The ends justify the means" would apply to the Pax Romana, or Roman Peace; unifying the known world in peace under the Roman government.

Edited 2008-06-09 05:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Oliver
by SCHWEjK on Sun 8th Jun 2008 19:56 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
SCHWEjK Member since:
2006-04-05

Besides that, Manson released some decent folk rock albums ;) They're not the best, but still ok...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by Oliver
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 9th Jun 2008 00:02 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, I happen to find the Tao Te Ching Italian translation by Julius Evola, a well known fascist, by far the best translation in any modern language.
Should I stop using it because he was a fascist?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Oliver
by yahya on Tue 10th Jun 2008 14:17 in reply to "Comment by Oliver"
yahya Member since:
2007-03-29

would you use work of Charles Manson or maybe Hitler? Sure it's not really comparable but I do think you know what I'm thinking of. That said, it's hard to work with some stuff and forget about the person behind it. So the code isn't the murderer, but ...


... and Hans Reiser is not Hitler.

This is really one of the most pointless Hitler references I have read in a long time.

Reply Parent Score: 0