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

441–450 of 681 posts

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#441

Post by nebulous1 »

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…

> Things like "consent" or even a misrepresentation of the person's age are generally considered irrelevant

Legally, frequently you are correct, but not always culturally. To leave Minsky aside, I believe a lot of people accept the misrepresentation argument even when the law doesn't, usually when the ages are close and the minor is somewhere they shouldn't have been allowed. The typical example would be a 20 year old meeting a 17 year old at an 18+ event.

Stallman is an ivory tower thinker. His inability to accept the societal rules you mention are core to him being Stallman. At some point he seems to have decided that his moral philosophy revolves around the concept of harm rather than rules. This is what led him to his earlier posts on incest, sex with minors and necrophilia, if nobody is being harmed then in what way is it wrong? The most obvious answer is that Stallman is incorrect that nobody is being harmed, however I should point out that these topics are actually discussed in related academia (the incest and necrophilia ones are more popular because they doesn't garner the same backlash).

The Minsky issue is complicated by the difference between what Stallman was defending and what now seems to be the actual case. As far as I can tell Giuffre was actually 18 (she was 17 the previous year when she was on the same flight as Minsky) and it seems she didn't actually have sex with Minsky (this isn't clear, she never actually said she did and apparently Minsky mentioned the encounter to people at the time and said he rejected her).

However, Stallman was arguing for the facts as he thought they were, which was that Minsky did have sex with her when she was 17, with her instigating things at Epstein's behest. Stallman was again engaging his ivory tower, questioning how we can call him a rapist if she was 17 but not if she was 18, and how can we blame him for things he didn't know (that she was being coerced). This is exactly how we already knew Stallman thinks. He has ignored some things here, such as what 75 year old Minsky could reasonably believe was going on when an 18 year old came on to him on Epstein's island, but they're facts that could have been pointed out to him and might have changed his opinion. Or perhaps not, if that situation happened to Stallman he might indeed think that finally, after all these years, he has found the cute 18 year old who is into geriatric nerds.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#442

Post by CathedralBorrow »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #428
CathedralBorrow wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well there were also those posts about having sex with children sometimes being quite fine. Edit: The downvotes are interesting given that this is how Stallman himself characterized those posts: "Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it."

Have you actually read the contents of the Guardian article Stallman linked? No? Here come a few quotes: > If there's no bullying, no coercion, no abuse of power, if the child enters into the relationship voluntarily … the evidence shows there need be no harm. > A Dutch study published in 1987 found that a sample of boys in paedophilic relationships felt positively about them. > And a major if still controversial 199…

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing."

Was he repeating anyone here? Could you take the posts as a whole and resist the urge to cherry pick?

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#443

Post by foldr »

tasuki wrote: post #422
foldr wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what could be more normal than an 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island willingly offering free sex to a man in his 70s? How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss?

> How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss? Reportedly, Minsky did suspect that something was amiss and refused the offer.

I know, but RMS was saying it would have been ok if he hadn't, hypothetically.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#444

Post by craftoman »

Stallman is missing, many fear of social isolation or even suicide. You can't ruin someone's career & life based on an opinion that was "leaked" and consider the fact that Italy's former prime minister was involved in an actual orgy with underage models but no one cared about and this guy is still one of the most respectable persons in Italy.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#445

Post by DocTomoe »

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 think what we as an industry need is a blacklist of people who have been part of these kind of lynchmobs.

Let them have their own industry.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#446

Post by Kbelicius »

op00to wrote: post #269
meerita wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I am not. But what proof do you have Minsky had sex with a minor? I didn't see it. I think Stallman didn't see it.

Who needs proof about Minsky? RMS said he thinks the children couldn’t be sexually assaulted because they wanted it. You’re defending this creep? Do you agree that it’s not kiddie rape if the kids don’t complain?

> RMS said he thinks the children couldn’t be sexually assaulted because they wanted it.

Why are you lying?

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#447

Post by roenxi »

FactolSarin wrote: post #430
roenxi wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 50% of that article isn't Stallman related, and some of the choice quotes are a bit unbelievable. Eg: > I recall being told early in my freshman year “If RMS hits on you, just say ‘I’m a vi user’ even if it’s not true.” That sounds like a joke. I mean, it is a joke. That isn't a serious comment/strategy on harassment. No creep has ever been forestalled by someone claiming to be a vi user. 1 stupid opin…

I don't know. Have you ever read Stallman's appearance requirements[1]? I mean, yeah, it's probably a joke. But I wouldn't be shocked it it were true either. [1] https://github.com/ddol/rre-rms/blob/master/rider.txt

Yes I have. It is more reasonable than people give it credit for. If most of the people honestly catalogued all their quirks they'd end up with something fairly similar. Usually the courtesy when travelling is to put up with whatever the host provides, but that is less realistic when someone spends a lot of time travelling.

How is a host meant to figure any of the details in that rider out ahead of a Stallman visit without him telling them? It could easily be a log of all the things that have gone wrong for him in the past.

People like to go to the parrot quote. It wouldn't at all surprise me if a Stallman fan who was putting him up the the night tried to buy a parrot if they thought it would make him happy. The man's selfless dedication to the public good has earned him a couple of true believers over the years.

It is also comprehensive and doesn't mention anything about Vi.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#448

Post by snagglegaggle »

rimliu wrote: post #375
mcv wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have anything to do with diversity of opinion or lack thereof. If this article is correct, the issue is simply a blatant misrepresentation of what Stallman said. I admit I haven't been following this news very well so far, so I'm doubtless missing some important facts. I'd heard Stallman was stepping down because of something he said about Minsky, but I have no idea what that was. If this is it, and this a…

And how do you feel about weirdos who treaten to kill themselves if a girl won't go out with them?

This is completely orthogonal to OP's point. Indeed the original article was libel. I can't flag post, but it should be.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#449

Post by ziofill »

mieseratte wrote: post #383
ziofill wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ability to brush off the words of a respected superior (parent, manager, supervisor, etc...) is not equally distributed in the population. Female students have a disadvantage over male students, especially in fields that are male-dominated (such as CS or Physics), LGBT members are even more disadvantaged. The harm is in the compounding of a hostile environment, and when the hostility comes from a person of consid…

> Don't take my word for it, there is a lot of research on these social dynamics. Well unless you cite the research, the only option you've given us is to take your word.

As if you'd go and read it ;)

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#450

Post by raxxorrax »

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…

Straight to the point, great comment. Someone like Stallman, founder of the FSF, GNU and other projects is just so beyond the level of decency that people complaining about his behavior have shown in recent weeks.

The MIT and some members of the FSF should be ashamed of themselves.

Never heard anything worthwhile from his critics. It is certainly not Stallman that makes our industry look bad. That is on you and that is all there is to say.

Post reply on HN