Live data from Hacker News

Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

medium.com

91–100 of 580 posts

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#91
post #10

Umm.... absolutely not. These quotes (directly from his site) beg to differ: > “I am sceptical 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.” > “There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing par…

>> Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him > Umm.... absolutely not. These quotes (directly from his site) beg to differ: Do you know him? Aren't you vilifying him? Having an unpopular opinion isn't grounds for "proper judgement" of being constantly harassed by a mob every time his name is brought up.

I don't personally know Charles Manson, but I think he is definitely deserving of vilification.

Now, that doesn't mean that RMS (or anyone else) absolutely certainly deserves being vilified by people who don't know them, but the entire premise is false: knowing someone (personally, I assume is the implication?) is not a necessary condition for condemning their behavior.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#92

Richard Stallman has been vilified by those who experienced him. His actions are reported to repeatedly exceed what is permissible without societal censure, regardless of the logic and/or reasoning behind them. Knowing him is not necessary to react to him, and to tell stories of his actions to others.

If his logic didnt matter, shouldnt he be condemned for only being inappropriate or hostile? Yet it seems that his current reputation among the public at large is that of an actual paedophilia/rape apologist. Whether he actually was or not, this lack of concern for subtleties is the very reason why "societal censure" should only be the authority on matters relating to politeness and not criminality.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#93

We are, sadly, entering a new age of conformity. Aligning yourself with what main stream society thinks is correct is now more important than anything else. The response of course is that "bad behavior should never be excused, regardless of ability!" which leads to a losing argument in which we try to say what kind of good excuses what kind of bad. But this presupposes the conformist stance: that fitting in with the…

> We are, sadly, entering a new age of conformity

We have always been in an "age of conformity". For example, Obergefell v. Hodges was decided less than 5 years ago. There are still children who are homeless because they aren't sexually conformant.

What is changing is not the degree to which society demands conformity. All that is change is who has to conform, and the standards to which they have to conform.

Conformity is not bad. Abstaining from wanton murder and theft is conforming to social norms. What matters is whether the norms are good ones.

> The Hacker culture from which everything we have today in tech arose.

This is a nice origin fantasy, but it's really not true.

The uniforms at DoD and the suits at IBM/Intel/AT&T/Xerox/etc. played a huge role in envisioning, organizing, and bankrolling all that work.

Also, that work was done by of hundreds of thousands of white-collar and blue-collar professionals. Many of those engineers and technicians were not self-described "hackers" or "nerds". A lot of them contributed by digging ditches and climbing polls. A lot of them were brilliant engineers who at 5pm turned off the computer screen, went home to their families, and didn't think about work until 9am the next day.

> The culture which makes this site "Hacker" news, is one in which doing something interesting is more important than anything else... why aren't you doing something interesting?

Because some times boring things are important to help society function or to make money. Examples: Attending city council/school board meetings. Being a middle man. Running warehouses. Selling advertisements. Giving away vaccines and moz nets. And honestly 99% of other work done by companies, nonprofits, and active citizens. Including software companies. Boring, not interesting, and yet to varying degrees important. In fact, some of those things are super interesting (ad auctions, for example, are wonderful fun for math nerds) but not nearly as important as the boring things (passing out vaccines or setting up moz nets or taking minutes at a city council meeting -- seriously, not fun).

> But maybe it's this fear that leads us rushing back to deep moral systems likes religious fantastics when their faith is questioned.

We all have our convictions and stories in which we find meaning.

We're all unreasonable defensive about those stories we tell ourselves.

...In fact, on that note, one more thing to add to the list of boring things that we for some reason feel the need to do: political arguments on a news forum that financially benefits VC by tapping into a fantastical ethos about the origin of modern computing.

Now, tell me no one here is going to get unreasonably defensive about that ;-)

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#94
post #80
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally. I get that the OP is from Stallman's publicist. But I think a good publicist shouldn't at worse be selective about the truth, not say outright false things like this. Plenty of people who know Stallman have made it clear that Stallman's behavior is consistent, harmful, and willful. E.g.: https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1172422966904160257

And who, if I may ask, is this person who is so eagerly ventilating his opinions to feed the wolves? To me it sounds more like he's upset because RMS didn't agree with him, which would be his problem in a sane world.

> And who, if I may ask, is this person

"This person" is Thomas Bushnell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bushnell

> who is so eagerly ventilating his opinions to feed the wolves? To me it sounds more like he's upset

This is just my reading, but "A reflection on the departure of RMS" does not have the tone of someone who is upset nor someone who is eager. It has the tone of someone who feels like they have a unique perspective that ought to be shared on a difficult subject.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s autistic. Suddenly the people who were annoyingly vocal about being “inclusive” are forgetting Stallman’s disability. He says “creepy” things because he doesn’t understand social cues or casual communication at a certain level. Everyone in this thread demonizing RMS should be ashamed of themselves. This is the same reason why he can’t hold a relationship, or why he sleeps in his office. He’s just far out there -…

>He’s autistic. this is literally the "we need better mental health facilities because of gun violence" argument. the vast majority of autistic people do not behave like stallman. it's not a pass. if he's so fucking smart why didn't he figure out how to comport himself better amongst the normies?

You can start by reading something about the condition, instead of assuming and insinuating, and making inacurate similies.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#96
post #82

If you read the article she notes that the infamous "hot ladies" photo was the result of someone else writing and then snapping that shot of his office door. People only see what they want to see. I see a bunch of people beating up on and attacking an awkward "nerd". It reminds me of high school.

But on Twitter all you see is this; https://twitter.com/sarahmei/status/1172283772428906496?s=21

https://i.postimg.cc/HW8q1j1s/Screenshot-2019-10-01-at-3-00-...

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#97
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the nuance of the language as selected. "I am skeptical" clearly prefaces a desire to be made aware of actual scientific evidence, to have the citations (references to the evidence) provided. Further, you, and others who keep beating this dead horse, do not realize that it is part of a larger, ongoing, discussion in which (IIRC from prior HN threads), RMS had that skepticism resolved with knowledge by…

The facts are that these days you just can't discuss some topics "logically" in a public setting. There are forbidden topics that only have one acceptable position. For example, it's not acceptable for anyone to discuss why blackface is offensive and clowns/mimes are not.

The blackface discussion isn't taboo, it's just been discussed to death and there's only one reasonable position. Google minstrel shows. The history of blackface is one of mocking black people. There is no way to "logically" argue that it isn't offensive because there are no facts to back up that claim.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#98

Richard Stallman has been vilified by those who experienced him. His actions are reported to repeatedly exceed what is permissible without societal censure, regardless of the logic and/or reasoning behind them. Knowing him is not necessary to react to him, and to tell stories of his actions to others.

Imagine the world if Stallman had been excommunicated from tech after the first awkward/offensive interaction he had with someone.

I sure wouldn’t.

Tangentially: I better not see anyone here lionize Steve Jobs ever again, because he inflicted actual physical trauma on people. He didn’t just piss them off with his failure to recognize social cues.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#99
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s autistic. Suddenly the people who were annoyingly vocal about being “inclusive” are forgetting Stallman’s disability. He says “creepy” things because he doesn’t understand social cues or casual communication at a certain level. Everyone in this thread demonizing RMS should be ashamed of themselves. This is the same reason why he can’t hold a relationship, or why he sleeps in his office. He’s just far out there -…

This is bull. He had decades to learn not to make women uncomfortable by doing one single thing - calling his business card his "pleasure" card when he handed it to a woman - and he still does that. That's not autism. Autism might hypothetically lead to doing that until someone pulled him aside and told him it was creepy and made others uncomfortable. After that it's just being an asshole.

I'm copy-pasting a comment from earlier on because I got late to that discussion and it's doubly relevant when the standard here has gone down from "hindered the work of MIT/FSF" to "made XX-class people uncomfortable".

--

I think the most interesting part of this gotterdamerung is the claim in “Remove Stallman appendix A” that if the work of a Great Genius hinders The work of some number of talented skilled folk, then society is ultimately at a loss. I’m not certain that this is necessarily true. Or false for that matter. I have an intuition, possibly colored by an overall culture of hero worship, that it is false.

This is the rationale: the dynamics large groups of people inevitably approaches that of a committee. Committees are averaging devices that smooth potentially groundbreaking ideas out of serious consideration. Genius on the other hand is not only extraordinarily capable of such groundbreaking ideas but is able to insist on them doggedly.

OTOH it means that one true genius (and maybe Stallman isn’t one, but true geniuses have very very often been assholes) is worth almost an infinite number of merely talented folk.

The ultimate question: what lifted us from mere animal status 10-15K years ago? A handful of geniuses or a general society awakening?

But also; how may “young talented physicists” it takes to change a lightbulb?

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#100
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s autistic. Suddenly the people who were annoyingly vocal about being “inclusive” are forgetting Stallman’s disability. He says “creepy” things because he doesn’t understand social cues or casual communication at a certain level. Everyone in this thread demonizing RMS should be ashamed of themselves. This is the same reason why he can’t hold a relationship, or why he sleeps in his office. He’s just far out there -…

If you have a condition where you have trouble interacting socially with people, while also running an influential organization and acting as its figurehead, you need to be able to mitigate these issues. If this means you have an assistant who you run emails by before sending them, so be it. If your assistant also takes a look at your office (given to you as a favor by a respected educational institution) and tells y…

If he had the capacity to comprehend any of this he wouldn't be the sort of person who talked about the Knight of Hot Ladies at work. Unless Garrett somehow turned out to be a some kind of medical expert, his opinion on Stallman is about valid as Stallman's on anyone else.
Post reply on HN