Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him • Hacker News Board

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

#231

Post by pseudalopex » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:15 AM UTC

least wrote: post #130

Pfhreak wrote: post #43

Dude has gone out of his way to make other people uncomfortable. I use singular they for my pronouns. He's so bothered by this that he goes out of his way to not only tell me I'm wrong for doing so, but to invent his own language for referring to folks who use gender neutral pronouns (which no one will understand, because it's not widely used). I would certainly question whether I was welcome at an event where he was…

There are many third person pronouns that people have suggested that are not widely in use today, including singular they. Ze, zhe, per, zer, e, etc. [1] have all been proposed at various points in time (and some have resurfaced in the past several years) and there are people who identify by these pronouns. If singular 'they' is valid, then so are they (plural, referring to the alternative third person gender neutral…

Singular "they" has been widely used for over 600 years.

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

#232

Post by mixmastamyk » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:15 AM UTC

JabavuAdams wrote: post #136

mlevental wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a large contingent of people on hn (in tech, in the world) that fetishize "logic" and believe it always trumps "feelings". i put both in quotes because to this contingent both of those concepts have absolutely zero relation to their actual form. i too used to be quite fond of making completely dispassionate arguments about controversial things (race, gender, class, etc.) because i believed that the entire con…

I'm amused that this very wise very true comment is downvoted on HN. 20 year old me would have downvoted it. 40 year old me recognizes it as obvious and has a divorce to show for it. There's no way 20 year old me would have believed 40 year old me, though.

Both points of view are “wrong.” As always a balance taking context into account is best.

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

#233

Post by raxxorrax » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:16 AM UTC

aonsager wrote: post #101

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #72

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…

Yes there is a benefit to radical thinking and nonconformity, but "do it without hurting others" is a reasonable line to draw. Stallman was viewed as a toxic individual who caused harm, and this is what our society is trying to weed out. I still believe, perhaps naively, that it's possible to maintain not-normal opinions without causing pain to the people around you. And this is something that everyone needs to do, w…

Saying Stallman did hurt others in the context of all the work he did isn't just naive in my opinion. Try to weed out people from your society if that is your calling, but don't be surprised if people want to weed out you.

Frankly, I think this is ridiculous.

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

#234

Post by maximente » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:17 AM UTC

aonsager wrote: post #101

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #72

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…

Yes there is a benefit to radical thinking and nonconformity, but "do it without hurting others" is a reasonable line to draw. Stallman was viewed as a toxic individual who caused harm, and this is what our society is trying to weed out. I still believe, perhaps naively, that it's possible to maintain not-normal opinions without causing pain to the people around you. And this is something that everyone needs to do, w…

no, that's not how he "was" viewed by those on the outside, at least; that's incredibly unfair and ignores the mountains of progress he fought and sacrificed for for many decades.

i cannot think of a more principled and consistent individual in the realm of technology than RMS, nor someone who's actually completely trustworthy in this day and age. in the tech sphere his logic was talmudic as far as i can tell: not only that, but his principles probably cost him millions of dollars or more - whatever some BigCorp could pay him to shut the hell up, or buy/relicense GCC, or whatever.

honestly, it's a miracle that everything isn't completely proprietary already. that RMS and others were able to hold that line, to the extent that they did, against the money their enemies had, was nothing short of heroic.

who is next in line? who else can you trust in a world of selling every morsel of data, invading every possible private nook of our lives still remaining? i really can't think of anyone off the top of my head. unfortunately, that means we'll probably even faster acceleration of proprietary crapware added in to various devices.

that he's insufferable or whatever in person is regrettable, but one cannot merely ignore the insanely principled views he espoused, contributions he made, and rights he defended for the sake of anyone consuming technology today.

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

#235

Post by yakshaving_jgt » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:19 AM UTC

JabavuAdams wrote: post #136

mlevental wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a large contingent of people on hn (in tech, in the world) that fetishize "logic" and believe it always trumps "feelings". i put both in quotes because to this contingent both of those concepts have absolutely zero relation to their actual form. i too used to be quite fond of making completely dispassionate arguments about controversial things (race, gender, class, etc.) because i believed that the entire con…

I'm amused that this very wise very true comment is downvoted on HN. 20 year old me would have downvoted it. 40 year old me recognizes it as obvious and has a divorce to show for it. There's no way 20 year old me would have believed 40 year old me, though.

From my perspective, it did not seem wise to make a reductionist analogy to how Israelis feel about Palestinians, and vice versa.

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

#236

Post by johnny22 » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:19 AM UTC

chasing wrote: post #162

qzx_pierri wrote: post #65

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 -…

Is he actually autistic? Or is it a convenient diagnosis people give him to excuse his behavior? (I can't find any actual reference to him being autistic on the web. Please enlighten me.)

I've been wondering that myself. I've yet to see anything from him that says so.

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

#237

Post by rland » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:20 AM UTC

overgard wrote: post #113

mlevental wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a large contingent of people on hn (in tech, in the world) that fetishize "logic" and believe it always trumps "feelings". i put both in quotes because to this contingent both of those concepts have absolutely zero relation to their actual form. i too used to be quite fond of making completely dispassionate arguments about controversial things (race, gender, class, etc.) because i believed that the entire con…

The whole point of rational dispassionate discussion is exactly because everyone has their own subjective feelings and experiences and biases. You have to put them aside to have a useful discussion. Prioritizing personal experience and saying “you cant know what its like if youre not X” is a bad bad social meme. I mean lets pretend its true. So what? It doesn’t advance the discussion at all, its only purpose is to en…

There lies the issue. Let's take the extremes:

No two people share the same experience, therefore discussion is not possible, because one cannot share exactly the viewpoint of the other. That's the extreme on one end.

On the other end, we can only take "rational facts" into account. In order to do this, we must discard completely all personal experience, which is first of all actually impossible between two human beings sharing a discussion, and second of all, will transform both participants into what amounts to deterministic computers who will arrive at precisely the same outcome given the same input.

Now clearly if we are arriving at a shared conclusion between two people discussing a shared input, either extreme is impossible.

Some nuance is required.

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

#238

Post by ineedasername » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:20 AM UTC

ahelwer wrote: post #196

ineedasername wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound as though autistic people are unable to learn appropriate social behavior. That is not only false, it does an extreme disservice to the entire community of people on the spectrum.

Well it's a spectrum, right? Some can, some can't - or refuse, for reasons related to them being on the spectrum.

I'm not sure that interpretation accurately represents the abilities of someone on the spectrum that is able to do productive work in society. But regardless, not everyone with all disabilities are qualified for all jobs. In this case, whatever the cause of Stallman's unwillingness &/or inability to behave in a way that doesn't make people feel uncomfortable or bullied, it also makes him unsuitable for these leadership roles. While some of GNU & FSF can be laid at his feet, in many ways they became successful despite him, not because of him.

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

#239

Post by throwawayc7a92a » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:22 AM UTC

zaroth wrote: post #82

flippinburgers wrote: post #67

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

I see trans people engage in the kinds of behavior described in this thread all the time. Trans women engineers with good paying jobs at companies like Google, Twitter, GitHub, Hashicorp, etc. who post a lot more creepy sexual stuff publicly and nobody bats an eye. Why is that?

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

#240

Post by raxxorrax » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:22 AM UTC

vnth93 wrote: post #92

floatingatoll wrote: post #8

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.

Some people might not share your primitive ambitions for witch hunts, which is all this is.