They're not the one whining about how systemd's stolen the "good old days".

As they say: working code or gtfo. Complaining about someone else's software project is so passé. No-one's forcing anyone to use systemd, Linux, or a computer.

They are doing something inexcusably worse than complaining about something bad that happened to them.

What you right here just did, was exactly whining and complaining, except not even about anything that happened to you or that you have to deal with.

The projection here is fascinating.

> Exactly. So why is it part of your init system?

Is it?

Systemd is not an init system. One component of systemd is an init. There are other components.

People hate it because one part of it is designed to run as pid 1? I don't follow.

(People hate systemd? They hate a piece of software? Eesh)

Yes, I certainly do hate systemd. Its pid has nothing to do with it.

What has to do with it is people being unable to tell you why it contains a virtualization manager. In fact the response "it is not an init system" tells you pretty much everything. It is a terrible piece of software, which has completely lost all focus.

I hope you get to a happier, less angry place in your life where you no longer hate an inanimate piece of software.

Anyone who tries to use complex software without really knowing what they're doing is going to have a bad time. I'm not sure that's the software's fault :-)

Well I was using (and developing) ssh well before the majority of commenting people were even bore. But sure, that does not mean a thing.

Or maybe the people who think it's a good idea have a different perspective and value system to you?

Labelling a technical decision that was made about a system design (that a lot of people agree with) as "not sane" makes you look like a fundamentalist.

I would like to talk to a sane person who

* decided to covertly move port 22 from sshd to systemd while actively masking the change so that `ps ax` shows "sshd" in the process title

* decided to not mention this fact in sshd_config while leaving the Port configuration clause in place

Yeah, call me a fundamentalist, I would like to talk to a sane person like that.

Good luck using software you don't like, I guess. Each to their own.

> Which we somehow did not have for the last few decades. I wonder why.

Speak for yourself. Lots of us spent many man-months over years engineering around crusty 80s abstractions that no longer worked.

And yet, some of us manage to successfully run critical national infrastructure on stacks that include Linux distributions running systemd.

Isn't MacOS a UNIX?

Maybe someone should port smf or launchd to Linux?

I have a chemistry degree and an entire career doing software / system engineering in financial services.

I've also hired a boatload of people with STEM degrees. In fact (massive generalisation warning) I prefer hiring them to those with computer science degrees.

How does one pivot into finance with a stem degree and computer engineering experience? What are you looking for in a resume and what's the interview process like?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "finance". I'm talking specifically about technology & engineering in financial services.

But mostly, in a resume, I'm looking for 1) evidence of competence (do you know what software is and how to make it), 2) evidence of interest in the domain and 3) evidence of being able to communicate with others.

Everything else specialist can be taught / learned. You don't need to know either how to balance a tree, or how to calculate the value of an IR swap.

The usefulness of that depends on whether you think academic higher education is vocational ("I'm doing a chemistry degree so that I can be a chemist") or inquisitive ("I'm doing a chemistry degree because it's so heckin' interesting").

I'd tend to advise people to study stuff they find interesting. I'd wager the percentage of degree holders doing a job that's directly related to their degree is in the minority, and that's not a bad thing.

Inquisitive education is great for people who’re independently wealthy or academically exceptional.

But the average person takes a real risk of underemployment with that approach.

A friend of mine with a degree in marine biology works as a barista, another with a philosophy degree works as a retail assistant.

Those people don’t have those jobs because of their degree.

As a non-wealthy, not particularly bright creative writing major, the focus of your degree only holds you back if you let it, or if you are utterly unwilling to work outside of your focus area. Tech, especially, has an absurd number of on-ramps for anyone willing to do the tiniest modicum of extra-curricular work.

Unfortunately while it shouldn't be the case, education for education sake is regarded as a privilege for the wealthy.

Most are becoming educated and going into significant debt to get a specific job, or salary.