This is way out there, but when I am up in the very early mornings, I think about things like this in the morning’s quiet and stillness.
What do you think the future holds? Joe’s bday today sparked me thinking about the fact most of the steady ‘assistants’ on the forum are in the retirement-age bracket (which I really didn’t think was the case with Linux). How long before we all get dementia (even if we don’t have it yet lol)? What does the future hold if most of ‘us’ (us being Linux users) age out? Are we being replaced by influxes of younger folk?
Very minor contention, is that Linus (love or hate him) has been the focal point of the kernel for…well forever. I know there are other people that can step in when he decides he’s done, though people we expected (like Alan Cox, for example) have often moved on after. I’m not so interested in the ‘star’ potential but more the grass roots community members. Because yeah, the kernel is important, but it’s certainly not the only important thing.
What do you think?
I was in University at the same time as Linus. We’ve watched as we’ve slowly grown up with Linux, and become the “old-timers” that we used to see named on the boot logs as they scrolled by.. (Eric S. Raymond et al).
There won’t be another generation like us, - that’s the nature of an organic product, and Linux will be something else when we’re gone. Will it continue with repos and maintainers and a culture of FOSS? I think it’s heading that way, as people learn to take power back from megacorps who do nothing but deliver value to shareholders while sucking the world dry.
I don’t think we need to worry about succession. Whether it’s Greg KH or Alan, or anyone else, there will always be people interested in the nature of what I’d call the raw side of the compute paradigm. Is there a generation growing up in some countries that are technically, functionally, and communicatively illiterate? Sadly, yes. That’s a whole other can of worms, but I’d like to think, there’s still enough people who are not part of the willfully ignorant, to continue what’s been started.
A general trend with younger folks is that they use mobile devices much more frequent. Yes, also laptops, but I’m more specifically talking about mobile phones, tablets and wearables. We already see that FOSS takes them into consideration, too, KDE and Gnome both have (I dare say rather lacklustre - sometimes I see a project on their pages but never “out in the wild”) efforts to support mobile platforms, and projects like GrapheneOS, Lineage OS and /e/OS do exist. I hope younger contributors will be captured with these kind of projects.
Anyway, as long as developers exist, the need for a Unix-like OS will persist, at least to power the many webservers in existence. Given that we have a strong base with Linux I feel like Linux will persist, on merit of financial motivation alone. Creating something new from scratch to power the worlds infrastructure sounds hella expensive.
This is a very interesting topic @dbarronoss
IMHO, it is not “being replaced” as such, just think of it as just a normal, natural developments, as our grand parents had Automobiles as a “new” invention in the 30’s, or as we had the internet in the 90s, the new generation born with internet at home, they just grew up with it, and they are living with it and with us, it is just normal development.
Well, I started Linux in 2000 (that’s like a quarter of a century. I see there are developers in the Linux days who were not there even then! So no worry.
You said it @chriscomputing
@chriscomputing I believe it is not about “financial” it is about quality and freedom.
We all know that M$ Windows you don’t actually “own” the OS, it is actually M$ that owns the user!
But as I see the statistics, though Linux on desktop is still very small percentage, but it is just a matter of time till we reach what they call “the critical mass”, an enough number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(sociodynamics)) that will make more and more users be available to show others and help others (same concept as everybody knows Windows). When this “critical mass” is reached I believe it will be the “default” OS, but who knows how long it will take.
That was kinda the opposite of what I was thinking…what IF we aren’t being replaced was more the concern 
I hope I live till the ‘critical mass’ (hahaah)
I obviously hope that the FOSS philosophy will survive and am positive it will. But if even that does not happen and corporations take over - they care about money more than anything else, and that’s I believe, even in the least free scenario, Linux will remain. If we can still call it Linux and if it is FOSS depends on the state of the world, but as far as the premise of this thread goes, Linux as an OS will remain.
And, realistically, even in the worst scenarios, somewhere someone will still run FOSS Linux. It’s to widespread and people are to strongly minded to delete that.
Not that anyone asked, but here’s the opinion of an old guy — 50+ years in software, 25+ of those with Linux.
All complex, organic systems evolve, change, and (hopefully) adapt successfully over time. They do not retain, maintain, or sustain stability. Instead, they continually strive to survive — to respond to and overcome entropy. There is no return to the past; there is only the option to adapt to present conditions, with the hope of future (long-term?) success.
That’s playing out in the Linux kernel right now with the tensions between the new developers using Rust and the old guard wanting to stick to C and C++. My view is that change is inevitable if you want to remain relevant.
We all get old, slow down, and retire. We get replaced by new people but hope we are remembered well. In that regard, few can have the impact or affection that Linus Torvalds has.
No, no…I don’t want to get old (haha).
As to new technologies, I can see both sides. I don’t want to have to learn new things (similarly the other side, I don’t want to have to learn new/old things).
Personally, whatever is best for the job or a fusion (not like the kernel doesn’t have assembly, C/C++, and a few other things already in it).
Robots running on Linux will run the Future Humans need not apply 
I guess the main subject within this topic is solely the age Linus Torvalds has reached already. And that other developers / maintainers stepped down form their role due to their age or general retirement.
But, as Linus Torvalds already expressed it already in conversations during the last years, he isn’t directly involved in the development as a programmer anymore. Linux has grown immensely and his work of maintenance and the coordination of kernel development has put him into the role of code reviewer who does has a final word about the road to take, which code complies to (his) standards and which coding practices should be avoided. I doubt that his current role could even be seen as the sole benevolent dictator of life (BFDL).
There are many more people involved in the development of linux, and Linus is focused on the kernel and it’s core functionalities. In the early years, as he was actively developing the code due to a lack of collaborators, he truely could be seen as a BFDL. But during the years additional maintainers joined the team and the number of kernel developers who are contributing to the kernel is in the range of 5000-6000 people. More than ~1200 are working actively on the kernel. And this includes ~700 maintainers, approximately. The list of maintainers is quite a long one.
In short, you won’t even find the name of Linus Thorvalds among the top contributors among the developers / tester & reviewers in the development statistics, such as the recent development statistics for the 6.13 release cycle. And beside the 2000 developers which were involved in the development of 6.13, those contributors are employed by 212 different companies, some of them volunteered in their spare time. But for a good part of those, it’s paid development work.
Thus, in conclusion, I’ld say that the development of linux will continue, definitely. And I guess the development work will continue almost seamlessly as a whole, there are many companies involved in the development already.
Just as another example, the creator of Python stepped down from his role as BFDL in 2018 … and this didn’t stopped the progression of Python. I can’t really tell if the language took a turn into the wrong direction due to this, generally I’ld say that it stayed by it’s core principles,
This is pretty interesting. I asked ChatGPT the following question:
How might the future of Linux unfold when Linus Torvalds is gone and younger people are in charge of the Linux kernel?
This was the response:
The future of Linux after Linus Torvalds eventually steps down or passes on will be shaped by several key factors—technical culture, governance, community norms, and external pressures. Here’s a grounded look at how that transition might unfold:
1. Succession and Leadership
Linus Torvalds has already delegated much responsibility to subsystem maintainers and lieutenants. The Linux development model is decentralized, with thousands of contributors and a layered maintainership structure. So:
- A new lead maintainer will likely be someone already respected in the kernel community (e.g., Greg Kroah-Hartman or another senior maintainer).
- Linux’s governance is informal but meritocratic and conservative—the kernel is unlikely to be drastically altered by a sudden influx of “younger” ideas.
- Stability will be preserved—it’s more evolution than revolution.
2. Cultural and Normative Shifts
The Linux kernel community has had a history of being harsh, which Torvalds himself has acknowledged and moderated over the years. The newer generation may:
- Push for more inclusive, collaborative practices, which is already underway (e.g., the adoption of a Code of Conduct in 2018).
- Improve documentation and contributor onboarding, making kernel development more accessible.
These changes may accelerate with new leadership, but the technical rigor will remain intact.
3. Technical Trends and Focus Areas
The younger generation may prioritize different areas:
- Security: With increasing emphasis on securing open-source supply chains, expect tighter security features (e.g., Rust adoption).
- Rust in the Kernel: A younger, safety-conscious developer base may expand Rust’s role in Linux, initially introduced for safer subsystem development.
- Performance vs. Maintainability: New maintainers might prioritize code cleanliness and modularity over sheer performance optimizations.
- Cloud and AI workloads: As Linux continues dominating in cloud and edge computing, kernel optimizations may focus here.
4. External Influence
The kernel’s direction is increasingly influenced by:
- Corporate backing (Red Hat, Intel, Google, etc.)
- Cloud providers optimizing kernels for their infrastructure
- Mobile/embedded vendors (e.g., Android’s use of Linux)
Post-Torvalds, corporate influence may grow, but the community is vigilant about keeping Linux open and vendor-neutral.
5. Tooling and Automation
Modern dev practices may reshape the kernel dev workflow:
- Better CI/CD and automated testing tools
- More use of static analysis and fuzzing
- AI-assisted debugging and patch review
This could reduce the reliance on individual gatekeepers and improve quality assurance.
Risks to Watch
- Fragmentation: If leadership becomes too bureaucratic or ideological divides grow.
- Loss of cohesion: If no one fills the Torvalds role of technical arbiter and consensus builder.
- Over-corporatization: If corporate goals eclipse community stewardship.
Bottom Line
Linux is robust enough to thrive beyond any one individual. Torvalds was critical in its birth and growth, but its future depends on its community, governance culture, and ability to adapt. Evolution—not revolution—is the likely path.
Please don’t ask ChatGPT further questions. And avoid it posting it’s responses. This is more or less almost an insult, if you consider the length of my previous post and other contributions here, which were completely written without the involvement of AI, I hope. Spoken for myself, I only used some regular web searches to facilitate some numbers and to provide relevant links to insightful sources.
@1093i3511, seriously? Calm down. I was just curious as to what an A.I. would say about this. I thought it was an interesting take. That’s all, nothing more.
He didn’t claim to have written it and was up-front about it being AI, so I can forgive it 
I’m not upset.
But up so far I really liked this forum as I had the impression that the majority of users here is skeptical about LLMs and it’s inflationary usage in terms of token requests which could be easily avoided.
DELETED in an effort to stop a possible argument from starting and taking this thread off-topic.
Well, no reason to delete anything. It’s only me who didn’t like ChatGPTs insights. And I’m definitely not representative for the whole community here.
Usually I address stuff which bothers me directly, so I did it with my response. Eventually phrased it a bit to harsh. But once I’ve expressed my discomfort / annoyance,.,. dann ist der Drops auch gelutscht which translates best to I’m over and done it. No harsh feelings or the intention to create an argument or a discussion out of it.
No comment! 
You know…you just make us terribly curious when you delete a comment…I’d rather you left it for continuity.
As far as ‘AI’ (no such thing really) goes, I don’t mind it, as long as folks actually know more than the AI and don’t treat it as gospel. It’s just a set of algos hitting a vast database.