Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 426 posts

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#311

Post by flatb »

lostjohnny wrote: post #231
mav3rick wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are okay forgiving people as long as their "net impact" is positive? Is it okay for someone to murder a person if they saved more than one life before ?

> Is it okay for someone to murder a person if they saved more than one life before ? Murder is a crime. Where is the crime here? It is ok to let go a "fuck you" if that persons did good before.

> Where is the crime here? The analogy is between a good thing not cancelling out a bad thing. The police are not involved. There isn't a crime. He has been pressured for making people very uncomfortable in pursuit of his sexual interests, which is a perfectly good reason to reprieve someone.

He has been accused, by several independent parties, of, among other things:

-Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office.

-Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him.

-Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#312

Post by flatb »

pjmlp wrote: post #144
mav3rick wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are okay forgiving people as long as their "net impact" is positive? Is it okay for someone to murder a person if they saved more than one life before ?

That is what armies happen to do all the time.

Can you explain, in general, how armies and war are ethically relevant to Richard Stallman threatening coworkers to kill himself if they don't go on dates with him, or asking them to lay down topless on a mattress in his office?

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#313

Post by doubleunplussed »

4bpp wrote: post #95
michannne wrote: post #38

It seems this thread and others like it has fueled a controversial honeypot, as some users are mass-downvoting comments that are perfectly in line with the content posted, simply because they stand for or against ousting Stallman, and others are doing the opposite -- mass upvoting comments that align with their predisposed view of the situation. I'd like to take sometime however to reiterate that freedom applies to a…

But consider the possibility that this might be perfectly rational behaviour for people who care about some side of the cause (even if it comes at the expense of HN as a forum): the victory condition for any belief is to be so universally accepted that its negation can not be expressed in polite company. If you come into a HN thread believing X and then see that every post stating X got downvoted into oblivion, maybe…

> the victory condition for any belief is to be so universally accepted that its negation can not be expressed in polite company.

This is a little bit terrifying to me. For me victory would be that the opposing view merely doesn't gain any traction when expressed, not that it can't be expressed - presumably due to social consequences. Any view that "wins" in this way doesn't deserve its victory - how do you know it's actually a good idea? Bad and good ideas alike can win in this way. Only good ideas are stable in the presence of the constant ability to question them.

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#314

Post by pjmlp »

flatb wrote: post #312
pjmlp wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is what armies happen to do all the time.

Can you explain, in general, how armies and war are ethically relevant to Richard Stallman threatening coworkers to kill himself if they don't go on dates with him, or asking them to lay down topless on a mattress in his office?

I was answering to "Is it okay for someone to murder a person if they saved more than one life before ?".

Armies don't have much issue with that ethical question.

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#315

Post by GoblinSlayer »

madacoo wrote: post #158
4bpp wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it all depends on whether you think persuasion or group membership signalling is what primarily influences people's beliefs. I was under the impression there was a wealth of studies suggesting that people basically do not respond positively to logical argument but are easily swayed by what they think everyone around them believes, but I completely failed to find any of them (or studies to the contrary, on t…

It's definitely an interesting question as to whether goal-choice itself can be a rational activity. Of course, it is necessary for a rational agent to begin with axioms and from there make choices. It seems perfectly coherent to me that we could, from those axioms, choose a further set of goals, each of which can be attained following a course of actions, and so on. And so I would contend that the goal 'cause the ce…

Goal choice is adaptation activity. For humans two approaches to adaptation were identified: social and empiric. Monkeys use them too (fun fact: monkeys are more likely to resort to empiric adaptation than humans).

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#316

Post by flatb »

craigsmansion wrote: post #181
malvosenior wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he’s defending his colleague having sex with a 17 year old who had been trafficked for sex since she was 15, then yes I don’t think any president of an organization should do that.

> If he’s defending That's a big "if" Stallman was reviled not for things he didn't do, but for thoughts he didn't think.

Stallman was reviled because he has been accused, by several independent parties, of, among other things:

-Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office.

-Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him.

-Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#317

Post by flatb »

lostjohnny wrote: post #200
marijn wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assumption that those who care about treating others decently can not at the same time be good technologists speaks volumes.

I still have to testimony an useful contribution (or proof of donation) from those attacking open source projects for not using gender neutral pronouns. I'm not young anymore, in my 40s, but I have hope that in the next 40 years some of them will stop being a dick and do actual work. It's never too late to change.

Can you detail, without strawmen or anecdotes, the thought process by which you equate asking to use gender neutral pronouns, or discussing the possibility of it, with "attacks"?

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#318

Post by hdfbdtbcdg »

flatb wrote: post #317
lostjohnny wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still have to testimony an useful contribution (or proof of donation) from those attacking open source projects for not using gender neutral pronouns. I'm not young anymore, in my 40s, but I have hope that in the next 40 years some of them will stop being a dick and do actual work. It's never too late to change.

Can you detail, without strawmen or anecdotes, the thought process by which you equate asking to use gender neutral pronouns, or discussing the possibility of it, with "attacks"?

Its not asking though. Its screaming, threatening and drumming people out of their jobs if they don't comply.

I say this as someone that uses gender neutral pronouns etc.

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#319

Post by flatb »

lostjohnny wrote: post #202
stelonix wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I've been thinking about this myself: whether a new foundation or movement will be created around RMS and without the stigmas that allow people to be "cancelled" over their thoughts or opinions. I have to say, the FSF without RMS simply makes no sense. It's one of those institutions where more than 51% of its effectiveness came from a single person. I firmly believe a "fork" for the FSF is coming soon.

it already happened. As usual, not trying to be prejudicial here, it happened in the U.S. where different 501(c)(3) formed to attract donation capital, but that actually have been an enemy of large part of the FSF community. There can't be one strong FSF they want many small feuds, it's like greenwashing, open washing is happening, which, BTW, "misses the point of free software". Look at what happened to Eben Moglen,…

> harsh, impolite, unempathetic, creepy or whatever BS they are throwing now at RMS.

He has been accused, by several independent parties, of, among other things:

-Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office.

-Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him.

-Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".

Do you think that reprieving someone for threatening a colleague to kill yourself if they don't give in to your romantic/sexual advances is "throwing BS"? It's an honest question.

Re: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software (2007)

#320

Post by flatb »

Smithalicious wrote: post #247
atoav wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could also see it the other way round: because of the importance of his figure people were more willing to keep their mouths shut and look the other way. Once the tipping point is reached, they don’t see any reason to do that anymore. This is why medival monarchs had jesters to tell them what is really going on. The right thing to do of course is to speek truth to power openly and before everybody else does it, b…

> If it everybody steps up now, it means there was clearly a disconnect between his self image and what his environment thought about him. Oh, certainly. And I'd say the reason for that is > because of the importance of his figure people were more willing to keep their mouths shut and look the other way I don't necessarily blame people for not spekaing out if they were troubled by his behaviour, but this is really un…

> Decades worth of small issues that Stallman was mostly unaware of

As a reminder, the "small issues" you mention include accusations, by several independent parties, of, among other things:

-Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office.

-Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him.

-Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".

Post reply on HN