IN relative terms, systemd isn't mature software. It's about a decade old, compared to 37 years of GNU and almost 30 years of Linux. But systemd rapidly takes over more and more functions in today's GNU/Linux systems and it is controlled mostly by IBM, which develops systemd on Microsoft servers.

"But systemd rapidly takes over more and more functions in today's GNU/Linux systems and it is controlled mostly by IBM, which develops systemd on Microsoft servers."The video above isn't intended to be too hostile; it's just pointing out some simple facts about systemd and highlights some of the main concerns, which are centered around vendor lock-in (for support) rather than technical aspects, including security.

Well, systemd may be working perfectly well in practice (except on some particular systems with unique setups); but should we therefore ignore possible future issues? It's not like IBM is getting any nicer and less aggressive, as we've mentioned in two videos over the past 24 hours [1, 2]. ⬆

Links/pages from the video:

1. The NSA Is Looking At Systemd's KDBUS
2. Systemd Had A Pretty Big 2020 With Homed, OOMD Components Merged
3. "By today standard it seems that any stupid idea you throw in qualifies as "modernizing"..." Phoronix comment
4. Running GNU/Linux With a Top Process Controlled by Microsoft and Far Too Many Lines of Code
5. What Former Debian Project Leader (Second to the Late Ian Murdock) Thinks About SystemD in Debian GNU/Linux
6. Simpler Systems, Better Systems
7. Systemd Has Become (Almost) an Operating System
8. Foreclosure by Systemd and IBM
9. Pseudo Novelty is Coming Home
10. Guest Meme: Systemd and GitHub as Digital Colonisation
11. The Systemd Song
12. Monopoly (or Vendor Lock-in) is Not Modularity