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

Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 943 posts

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#41

Post by nostrademons »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #8

I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…

Ribbonfarm called this a couple years ago:

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-g...

Specifically battlefront #8. He calls it consequential because the the neurodivergent/PC conflict highlights an inherent paradox in the PC worldview. Most applications of political correctness focus (at least on the surface) on defending a marginalized group against the verbal attacks of a privileged one. When applied to autistic or neurodivergent individuals, however, PC norms work to disadvantage an already disadvantaged minority against groups that are both larger and often more economically and culturally free.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#42

Post by hn8788 »

bigtones wrote: post #22
hYKdTfpa wrote: post #3

The attacks on him were dubious at best.

Are they.... here is a direct quote from him on a pro-pedophilia political party in 2006 that many that people took offence with: “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.” https://thenextweb.com/dd/2019…

When taken out of context it looks bad, but when it's part of a broader discussion about morality and law not always matching up, it makes sense. Age of consent laws vary around the world, and it doesn't make sense why someone could legally have consensual sex with someone in one country, but if they had sex in a place with different age of consent laws, they'd be branded a pedophile.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#43

Post by henriquez »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #29
henriquez wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement is analogous to saying “all autistic people are the same” which is itself very offensive.

To me, the only thing implied by the above comment is that "all autistic people are capable of being decent to other people." That doesn't seem offensive, although it may be incorrect (I simply do not know).

Clearly not all neurotypical people are capable of being decent to others, so how would it make sense that all autistic people are?

No, to assume that forgiveness or empathy to one autistic individual denigrates an entire spectrum of autistic individuals is the same as assuming that from the actions of one we can confer some sort of collective responsibility. This assumption is the root of all prejudice.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#44

Post by [deleted] »

colechristensen wrote: post #27
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #8

I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…

I do not. Being unusual does not free you from the burdens of being a decent person, especially while in a public leadership position, especially when your violations are a repeated trend over a very long period. With the right diagnostic criteria just about everybody who is an asshole could be diagnosed with some mental disorder or another and that is more or less the present state of psychology, that kind of reason…

[deleted]

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#45

Post by bpodgursky »

bigtones wrote: post #22
hYKdTfpa wrote: post #3

The attacks on him were dubious at best.

Are they.... here is a direct quote from him on a pro-pedophilia political party in 2006 that many that people took offence with: “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.” https://thenextweb.com/dd/2019…

This is not something I would say, or something I would ever recommend someone say, but it is 100% the type of open questioning an autism-spectrum person would ask when they don't understand the emotional weight or implications behind asking such a question.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#46

Post by SilverRed »

JohnHaugeland wrote: post #14
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, maybe it was "hard to interact with him" only if one was unwilling to accept his difference?

Please stop. He argued that pedophilia was okay.

Thats a serious misrepresentation of his words. He once had a page on his site saying that he did not think it was harmful if voluntary (eg, consent between people of similar ages but one being over age)

He has since removed the post and stated that its more complex than he initially thought.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#47

Post by benatkin »

colechristensen wrote: post #27
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #8

I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…

I do not. Being unusual does not free you from the burdens of being a decent person, especially while in a public leadership position, especially when your violations are a repeated trend over a very long period. With the right diagnostic criteria just about everybody who is an asshole could be diagnosed with some mental disorder or another and that is more or less the present state of psychology, that kind of reason…

> disqualifies him from being a public figure and leader

A lot of people can't do their jobs if they can't be leaders, depending on how you define it. I think that jobs that don't involve interacting with other people are being automated faster on average than jobs that do. So I think it's better not to be quick to disqualify someone from it.

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#49

Post by darig »

sebmellen wrote: post #36
colechristensen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not. Being unusual does not free you from the burdens of being a decent person, especially while in a public leadership position, especially when your violations are a repeated trend over a very long period. With the right diagnostic criteria just about everybody who is an asshole could be diagnosed with some mental disorder or another and that is more or less the present state of psychology, that kind of reason…

That’s such a ridiculous viewpoint. Someone should be disqualified from being a “public figure” for making bad off-the-cuff remarks? There goes half of Congress, half of Hollywood, many historic figures, and a fair share of executives. How can someone be “disqualified” from being a “public figure” anyway!???!

Never heard of executions?!!?!??!^#^#!#$ LOL

Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF

#50

Post by varispeed »

mrob wrote: post #25
varispeed wrote: post #9

I wish FSF also started caring about the developers. Free software was and is a great idea, but unintended consequence is that it also facilitates exploitation of software developers by big corporations who from the perspective of FSF are just users as regular people. This means they make billions off of a software who someone built in their rented flat, living a modest life, sometimes struggling with bills, meanwhil…

The goal of the FSF is "to promote computer user freedom". By "freedom" they mean the four freedoms of the Free Software definition: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html Your proposal contradicts freedom 0, so the FSF cannot support it without abandoning their mission. To do so is both undesirable and unnecessary, because the alleged "exploitation of software developers" is in most cases just people doing what…

Big corporations sponsor FSF then this is an understandable stance as what I am proposing would hurt their bottom line. Current situation saves them huge amounts of money from spending on R&D because developers all over the world will develop something for free (believing the PR around open source) and then if something catches on, big corporation can use it of appropriate it if you will. Sometimes developers from within those companies feel bad and then ask the corporation if they could contribute something. This is then again is turned into PR piece saying that you see we give back! Best outcome for the original authors is getting hired on mediocre salary at one of those corporations or having a cool entry in CV. I think you are missing the point and my idea does not contradict user freedom as users will continue to use it for free.
Post reply on HN