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

Joint Statement on the GNU Project

guix.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 310 posts

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#191

Post by bitwize »

bjourne wrote: post #79
bitwize wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just Stallman. This is an attempted systematic ouster of old-school hackers (and new-school hackers with old-school values) from positions of leadership. Stallman is just the latest target and also one of the softest. They have also called for the removal of: * Linus Torvalds ( after he apologized and approved the adoption of their code of conduct) * Ted Ts'o * the entire FSF board The problem is that while…

You're definitely painting with a broad brush. You can read Stallman's site and see for yourself that he is as left as they come (which is waaaay more left than "liberal"). Insinuating that there is some grand left-wing cabal conspiring to oust the "true hackers" is wrong. Some people apparently think Stallman is unfit to lead GNU, other people think he is. There is no need to throw accusations of malice around.

When I say "left liberal", think Chomsky, not Hillary Clinton. Someone who thinks individual freedom is paramount, but who also thinks that corporations are just as bad as governments.

The presently dominant current in the left prioritizes social justice over individual liberty, up to and including legal restrictions on freedom of speech under a constitution which expressly forbids such restriction (cf. the New York City ordinance forbidding the use of the term "illegal alien").

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#192

Post by shadowgovt »

Accujack wrote: post #178
tssva wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The man has problematic opinions. Welcome to democracy, where people with uncomfortable opinions are free to hold and discuss them. This is healthy. People are free to hold and discuss them but others are just as free to exercise their democratic right of free association by choosing not to associate with you because of them.

This last is a major contributing factor to the volume of those asking for his ouster... they are free to walk away and not use GNU or other free software, but they don't want to. They want to have their cake and eat it too, they want to keep free software and get rid of the guy that makes them feel bad about it because he's awkward and poorly socialized... like very many computer savvy people are. These people are a…

That's arguably what figureheads are for; to be set up and knocked down at the whims of the public. When a person becomes symbolic of an organization, they run the risk the organization will change (or they will) and dissociation will become necessary.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#193

Post by excursionist »

shadowgovt wrote: post #80
excursionist wrote: post #70

I see claims of users not being 'empowered' and not being able to 'trust' GNU software.. because of Stallman? Sorry, but what does the controversy surrounding Stallmman have to do with user empowerment and trust? Has Stallman been preventing people from using GNU software? Does the trustworthiness of this free, open source software diminish because of Stallman's opinion on some social/political issues that are comple…

They aren't completely unrelated to software. One can't divorce community issues from technical issues when the project in question has a "philosophy" page. From said page ( https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html ) """ “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. """ The way rms treats people involved in GNU goes directly to what is meant by 'community.' Consider, as comparative…

> One can't divorce community issues from technical issues when the project in question has a "philosophy" page.

Anything can have a philosophy. Just because someone is a communist or a feudalist shouldn't prevent them from contributing or being part of a free software project.

> The way rms treats people involved in GNU goes directly to what is meant by 'community.'

Has RMS done anything to prevent people from using GNU software? Has he attempted to move GNU in a direction that would violate its stated goals or philosophy? Has he made the software any less free or any less respectful of users' freedom and community?

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#194

Post by bitwize »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #163
maximente wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are reframing (weakening) the OP's standard. the standard is not "care", it's "gave as much of a fuck about software and personal freedom as Stallman did/does". RMS used an absolute garbage computer because it was, in his words: > the only laptop one could buy that could run a free initialization program and a free operating system. i'm certainly not taking it on some contributor's word that these 20 or so odd pe…

I completely agree with you. Moreover, I witnessed the same scenario in other projects, and it always ended the same way: once the charismatic leader was eliminated, people gradually lost motivation and everything dwindled. When people realized it was not worth it, it was already too late. Now that we lost Stallman it will be extremely hard to find a person even remotely as principled as he was.

One of Eric Raymond's innovations was to establish clear principles for the OSI at its outset, and then retire from the board out of a desire not to become one such "Jesus nut" for the movement.

The entryists have a response for this too: call for the removal and replacement of all the leadership of relevant organizations, as they have already done with the FSF.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#196

Post by simion314 »

shadowgovt wrote: post #188
simion314 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is complex situation but as a CEO or project leader or random open source developer that I am not that well informed with the latest social media culture how do I know what is a controversial opinions? I am legitimately asking this, say maybe I think that X feature is nature not nurture, and there is a discussion at an event about X , what do I Google to know if I should talk about X or not. The problem is more co…

I think you're looking for guarantees in the social world. There are no such guarantees (much as there are no guarantees in the tech space... That, say, your favorite language today won't be obsolete in five years and therefore diminish the value of all the time and effort you invested in memorizing its quirks). There are some useful heuristics, such as "try and be a good person, minimize your judgement of others, av…

Thanks for the response, but I get the feeling that you need to censor yourself and if you are asked and forced to tell your opinion on X you should probably give a political response. Should I express my personal opinion on abortion,drugs,prostitution,religion, alchool, smocking or should I censor myself.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#197

Post by shadowgovt »

excursionist wrote: post #193
shadowgovt wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't completely unrelated to software. One can't divorce community issues from technical issues when the project in question has a "philosophy" page. From said page ( https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html ) """ “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. """ The way rms treats people involved in GNU goes directly to what is meant by 'community.' Consider, as comparative…

> One can't divorce community issues from technical issues when the project in question has a "philosophy" page. Anything can have a philosophy. Just because someone is a communist or a feudalist shouldn't prevent them from contributing or being part of a free software project. > The way rms treats people involved in GNU goes directly to what is meant by 'community.' Has RMS done anything to prevent people from using…

Based upon past travel hosts' interactions with him, having him visit to speak on the topic can involve you needing to burn the sheets he slept on.

Yes, that has material impact on the organization; it decreases people's willingness to hear its leader speak on the topic of what the organization stands for.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#198

Post by oknenavin »

morelisp wrote: post #181
oknenavin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it tells us something about the "joint" part? So mob-sad..

Wiegley has probably done more to make Emacs exciting again than anyone since the XEmacs fork. (Which, hey, speaking of RMS driving off contributors...)

Sure, but taking part of a political games, doesn't make him a favor.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#199

Post by simion314 »

t0astbread wrote: post #133
simion314 wrote: post #29

I would suggest GNU people to not rush into decisions, the things are too heated at this moment, I am afraid we get a fracture of the project. I am also having a bad feeling that Linus Torwalds is next, that a list of 20 years old emails is already prepared and some people are ready to tweat something that maybe happened long in the past that made them uncomfortable. Maybe that public apology Linus did this year was…

Hasn't Linus already been critizised for his behavior last year-ish, then taken a break and changed the kernel dev culture (or something like that, I'm not up-to-date on kernel internals)?

yes, Linus made a clever move and kept his job(at least until some email in the future is misquoted in the press).

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#200

Post by xnaksd »

dragonwriter wrote: post #190
sprash wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FOSS community is about hobbyist recreational programming for FUN. If you want to kill the FUN you introduce COCs, you guilt trip people of a certain gender and race (white male) for simply existing and you create artificial drama via divide and conquer like the current Stallman campagn. Congratulations, mission accomplished, the fun has been eradicated. Inviting the corporate world into FOSS was a grave mistake.…

> The FOSS community is about hobbyist recreational programming for FUN. No, it was never exclusively about that, and it's become less dominantly about that over time. > Inviting the corporate world into FOSS was a grave mistake. The nature of “free” and “open source” is you don't get to choose who to invite.

Found the vicious bureaucrat.
Post reply on HN