It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software • Hacker News Board

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#121

Post by gowld » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 6:32 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #103

prepend wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people think statutory rape shouldn’t count. In the British Virgin Islands the age of consent is 16, so the crime Minsky is accused of isn’t a crime a little while away. I don’t think it’s fair, or accurate, to characterize the entire population of the British VI as being “totally cool” with other forms of sexual assault and human trafficking. I think the risk I run is in characterizing acts incorrectly. I’m…

I don’t get it. If it wasn’t rape (statutory or otherwise) then what is RMS saying isn’t “totally cool” about it?

The gist of what RMS said is that Epstein trafficking a 17 year old is bad, but if Minsky had sex with a 17 year old who gave the appearance of consenting, Minsky didn't do something wrong.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#122

Post by gowld » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 6:34 AM UTC

tom_mellior wrote: post #106

pault wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with you, but I think a lot of commenters here are talking past each other. We all agree that having sex with a 17 year old girl who is being abused and manipulated by a billionaire pedophile is inexcusable. I personally don't like the use of the phrase "child rape" to describe it because it's the same phrase you would use to describe the violent rape of a toddler. If the terminology we use to debate…

Fair enough. My comment above used obvious overstated sarcasm, but I agree that these things are different. Substitute "statutory rape of a minor" or something like that above. I don't think this means that we should judge RMS any differently. > having sex with a 17 year old girl who is being abused and manipulated by a billionaire pedophile [...] makes you a sleezeball Not the greatest way to put this, I think.

The "overstated sarcasm" and faked quotations is literally what pushed RMS out of his job. Congratulations.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#123

Post by gowld » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 6:37 AM UTC

dymk wrote: post #83

prepend wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends a lot on the context. I wouldn’t want to work on a project with a pedophile. But if someone was having a conversation about early Islam and trying to understand the cultures of that time, etc then that’s an example where your statement wouldn’t be ban worthy. I just don’t think there’s a clear set of bad things that can’t be said. Programmers I know are frequently doing thought exercises so even something…

> It depends a lot on the context The context is Epstein and RMS claiming that this woman trafficked by him was willing. We don't need to pontificate about all these hypothetical scenarios; this concrete thing that he's defending is pretty disgusting .

Your factual claims are not true, probably because you only read the lies published on Medium and salacious reposted, and did not read the source material.

RMS surmised that the woman "presented herself as willing" to Minsky. His point is that Minsky likely (in his estimation) was not aware of the coercion. He did not defend the coercion.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#124

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 11:55 AM UTC

twd99 wrote: post #94

it is all about rms being rms. When an act of illegal copying copyrighted material is called piracy, he pedantically says that it is a wrong term, because piracy is a penal crime that involves violence and forcible property theft. when a pimp presents an underage woman to a customer, he pedantically says that it wasn't an assault. I've read the whole email thread and didn't see him defending child rape and sex traffi…

[deleted]

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#125

Post by shadowgovt » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

A useful self-test on this topic is to consider the following question:

If we really needed to talk about the inception of ReiserFS, should we bail Reiser out of prison for a bit and pay him a speaker's fee? Or can we content ourselves with considering his technology while excluding the man?

It turns out, opinions differ on this. And while I'm not implying that RMS's words are worse than Reiser's actions, I'm noting that the fact some people believe the answer is "Yes, we do bail him out of prison for a bit" is telling on where people in our industry set the bar on dividing a person's works and their other qualities.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#126

Post by shadowgovt » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

rubbingalcohol wrote: post #9

> Remove everyone, if we must, and let something much better be built from the ashes. This is cancel culture taken to the extreme. Now that everything is built, the builders are expendable. They're "problematic." We're facing down a new form of puritanism that is a greater threat to civil rights than the "problematic" individuals they seek to destroy. No defense for RMS' statement, it's absurd, but if there's no mode…

It is entirely possible that the people who are good at building technologies aren't great at building cultures or communities, or at finding the most human-beneficial uses of those technologies. Different skillsets.

Wernher von Braun never went to the moon.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#127

Post by shadowgovt » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 5:43 PM UTC

rubbingalcohol wrote: post #23

mjg59 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't one problematic statement. It's a history of behaviour that's documented to have driven multiple people away from the free software community and an absolute unwillingness on his part to do anything about it. If your movement's leadership acts in a way that hurts the movement, what's the appropriate response? Everything short of pushing RMS out has been tried already.

People who run away from something when their feelings get hurt are no great loss to whatever "movement" they're too weak to contribute to. Free Software has much bigger problems than these losers.

This comment is precisely indicative of the attitude that is holding the Free Software movement back, and if pushing Stallman out gives better indication to the fact that this attitude is not to be tolerated, then his removal succeeds in sending the correct message.

The movement doesn't grow further as just an old-boys-club, or a tough-emotions-only club. That stuff is, quite frankly, exhausting and detracts from good engineering.

Re: It's time to talk about post-RMS Free Software

#128

Post by shadowgovt » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 5:44 PM UTC

rubbingalcohol wrote: post #51

mjg59 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally know high quality developers who refuse to work on free software projects because of Stallman. It's not a matter of weakness, it's a matter of principle.

So they only work on commercial software projects because of Richard Stallman?

Companies have cultures and legal constraints that get coworkers fired for perpetually hitting on their coworkers. That's a positive for a lot of people (myself included).

Bushnell makes the excellent point that he wasn't pushed out for this email alone, but for the pattern of thought the email indicates when aligned with other behaviors in his career.

https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-depa...