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

In Defense of Richard Stallman

geoff.greer.fm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 681 posts

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#161

Post by DanBC »

ourlordcaffeine wrote: post #118
mbel wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Which seem to go against all goals of diversity and inclusiveness. If we strive for more diverse community we have accept quirks of some people. Only in purely homogeneous group everybody can be comfortable and not offended.

Society: "We must embrace neuro-diversiry" Midly Autistic, not-good-looking man: Shows signs of autism Society: "No! Not like that! Kill it! Kill it!"

Stop using autism to defend someone who's said that raping children doesn't harm them.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#162

Post by alltakendamned »

coldtea wrote: post #76

Diversity -- but no diversity of opinion... Inclusiveness -- but let's ostracize the non-conforming aspie... Fairness -- but let's fire people or make them resign from unrelated positions for their personal opinions, because obviously all of a person's life should serve as a big PR, and god forbid they don't play the role 24/7. Someone might call them for it on Twitter, and what could their employee/organization do o…

The whole Stallman story very much seems to be modern day thoughtcrime

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#163

Post by ORioN63 »

spats1990 wrote: post #104
metiscus wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you cite some specific evidence for your specific claims?

On his website, for example, Stallman says that he "reject[s] the term sexual assault" completely.[1] ~edit: I have included the full quote below as I did not intend to twist/misrepresent in any way. Stallman writes: " The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same. There seems to be an excepti…

I'm split on your comment.

On one side, you indeed quote Stallman itself and the source of the quote. On the other side the complete quote reads:

     The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same.

     There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however.

     The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity.

     I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely.
Reading the full context and your except was totally different for me. The full context, implies he doesn't accept the term, because it's an umbrella term that does more harm, than good. That's arguable, but doesn't seem a radical opinion.

In fact, IMO, I agree that using "sexual assault" for something other than rape / attempt of, is depreciating the full meaning of the term and victims are normally the first ones to be affected by it. I do agree that other crimes, born from gender inequality, are very serious as well - that doesn't mean, we should bundle them up. How would society react, if slaps started to be prosecuted as attempted murders?

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#165

Post by fergie »

> You don’t get the free software movement without a person like Richard Stallman. Its success depended on a stubborn pedantic ideologue. It required someone who couldn’t take a hint.

This is really the crux of the matter. Richard Stallman should absolutely be held accountable for the stupid things that he has said. The problem is that humanity _really_ needs people like Richard Stallman- very few others have made such a practical (Emacs) and political impact on software, and by extension, the world as we know it. There aren't many Richard Stallmans, and if you get rid of all them then _really_ bad things will happen.

It is equally important that he is punished, that he repents, and that he continues his work.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#166

Post by foldr »

sergiosgc wrote: post #150
throw0101a wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Perhaps you need to read about more episodes: > I worked 10 years ago at VA Linux which had Richard Stallman on its board of directors. You might have heard that Stallman applied his open source ideas to his publicly…

I'm sorry for the specific request, but it must be a first hand account of an event. This second hand account can easily be the result of RMS being a difficult person to be around, for any number of reasons, constructed via word of mouth into a sexual issue. I haven't read the description of anything that resembles sexual abuse by RMS. (edited to remove an unintended reference to sexual assault)

Why are you shifting the goalposts to sexual assault? No-one here is saying that RMS has sexually assaulted anyone, and he wasn't fired due to allegations of that nature.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#167

Post by meerita »

coldtea wrote: post #76

Diversity -- but no diversity of opinion... Inclusiveness -- but let's ostracize the non-conforming aspie... Fairness -- but let's fire people or make them resign from unrelated positions for their personal opinions, because obviously all of a person's life should serve as a big PR, and god forbid they don't play the role 24/7. Someone might call them for it on Twitter, and what could their employee/organization do o…

I've read the mail from Stallman and I couldn't believe people forced him to resign just because he stated that 1 it is not clear assault 2, he don't disbelieve his colleague had sex.

BTW: I have also suffered the tough, complicated, unstable and rare personality of Stallman. Not for that I want to see him dead but like everyone else, when he has been unrespectful with me, I let him know. Everyone who knows Stallman knows he's a complicated and tough guy with very radical opinions and position. I was at a conference where he was cleaning the dirt from his toes while explaining everything, imagine the scene…

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#168

Post by Chris2048 »

throw0101a wrote: post #152
klingonopera wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't get X good thing without Y bad behaviour. Consider the following: Humans have limited capacity, thus time, money and energy spent limiting Y inhibits resources available to creating X.

While life is short, it is long enough that people can learn not to be assholes / jerks IMHO: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_No_Asshole_Rule * https://hbr.org/2007/03/why-i-wrote-the-no-asshole-rule * https://www.td.org/insights/dont-tolerate-brilliant-jerks * https://www.inc.com/jim-schleckser/why-netflix-doesn-t-toler...

So apsies are just jerks? right.

I can't see how packaging insults as a solution improves anything.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#169

Post by barry-cotter »

antientropic wrote: post #111
CPLX wrote: post #47

Our culture has made a very bright line decision that sex with minors is unacceptable. Expressing doubt about this cultural norm, or especially advocating against it, is considered unacceptable. Of course one can argue with the merits of those two facts, but they are plainly true and fairly widely accepted. The very concept of statutory rape reinforces how clear this judgment is. The reference to "statutory" means th…

If this social norm is so "phenomenally clear", then why are there such wildly different ages of consent even among western countries and US states? It seems strange that the ability to consent magically appears the day you turn (say) 18. I mean, the law has to draw a line somewhere, but intellectuals like RMS should be allowed to talk about such things without being cast out of civilized society.

RMS wasn’t an academic with tenure. Those are the only intellectuals who are free to discuss controversial things, apart from people with FU money, or a complete lack of fucks to give, like RMS.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#170

Post by viraptor »

twelvechairs wrote: post #139
viraptor wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. There's a difference between tolerating it to a degree and letting leaders continue uncomfortable awkwardness. If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. That doesn't remove anything from their achievements and abilities to contribute or to spread new ideas.…

> If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. Isn't the whole point of a 'leader' that they challenge the status quo not bite their tongue to follow it?

The point of a leader is that they do/present something that gathers followers. If the followers say "no, that's not ok", they're by definition not a good leader anymore (or not for that group of people - RMS can definitely create an FSF clone with people who accept him).

There's lots of leaders who love the status quo and organise people around it. No challenging needed. (for example priests being leaders for a small local community)

Post reply on HN