Urgh. Thanks for saving me a click.

Yeah but it seems to be a losing battle, sadly.

Low effort LLM-written content gets upvoted here anyway, despite the writer having little respect for peoples’ time.

You obviously can't get proof. But there are enough stylistic tells to confidently say that AI was substantially involved in writing this. It's annoying to read. That's enough to dislike AI writing IMO.

"Scientific Linux was never simply "RHEL with a different wallpaper." It gave the scientific community an institutionally independent implementation of the Enterprise Linux platform."

AlmaLinux and RHEL remain the main supported Linux distributions across much of the organization

Alma and Rocky provide almost the same thing.

I suspect that at the time they had to make a decision, Rocky Linux was not in good enough state, so they went with Debian, and now they already standardized around Debian, so no need to change.

The benefits of SL described are pretty handwaivy to me. Having used a fork of scientific Linux, this was a huge pain because of outdated openSSL packages. Now you could argue this deserves being maintained separately, but I think it makes total sense to use the security- benefits of long term distros and only modify the parts required for reproducible scientific work.

I was really glad when the vendor started unofficially supporting OpenSuse so I could finally use git on these distros.

Sad that the author chose to generate slop instead of writing an article about SL

Well they could have used Debian from the start. I get why, but it's such a strange argument, the way it's posited.