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

111–120 of 943 posts

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

#111

Post by nicklecompte »

subjectsigma wrote: post #97
nicklecompte wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is absolutely zero evidence Stallman has autism, none whatsoever, and absolutely no evidence that he has any neurological disability. The fact that he once described himself as “borderline autistic” isn’t evidence of anything (except perhaps that Stallman is a jerk who doesn’t care about people who actually have autism). As someone who actually has schizophrenia and struggles with it in the workplace and in soc…

Its strange to me that you think RMS has to "prove" that he's autistic (and therefore deserving of sympathy) - but decades of activism and writing about progressive topics (workers rights, trans rights, ending discrimination, improving IP laws, etc) can get undone in a matter of days by anonymous and uncorroborated accusations, and that's totally fine. You want him to get onstage with his therapist or something? Look…

Stallman himself said he wasn’t autistic[1], so this is really a case of his fans inventing a diagnosis to protect someone who doesn’t deserve it, smearing millions of innocent people in the process. It’s really indefensible. And one of the most frustrating things about bullshit like “RMS can’t help himself because of his autism” is that bullshit never goes away no matter how definitively it is debunked.

I also never suggested that if he did have autism that somehow I would be any more sympathetic. What I am frustrated with is ignorant commenters on Hacker News deciding it’s psychologically easier for them to invent lies and insult people with autism than it is to have an honest reckoning with a hero’s ugly legacy.

[1] https://www.computerworld.com/article/2551458/asperger-s-oxy...

> "During a 2000 profile for the Toronto Star, Stallman described himself to an interviewer as 'borderline autistic,' a description that goes a long way toward explaining a lifelong tendency toward social and emotional isolation and the equally lifelong effort to overcome it," Williams wrote.

> When I cited that excerpt from the book during the interview, Stallman said that assessment was "exaggerated."

> "I wonder about it, but that's as far as it goes," he said. "Now, it's clear I do not have [Asperger's] -- I don't have most of the characteristics of that. For instance, one of those characteristics is having trouble with rhythm. I love the most complicated, fascinating rhythms." But Stallman did acknowledge that he has "a few of the characteristics" and that he "might have what some people call a 'shadow' version of it."

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

#112

Post by snvzz »

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…

Slander, pretty much.

Fortunately, there's this review of the facts[0].

[0]: https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

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

#113

Post by mjg59 »

Guthur wrote: post #100
mjg59 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all different things, but the end result is that someone has been hit with a car. If your goal is to avoid people being hit with cars and someone keeps accidentally hitting people with their car, then you probably want to considering whether that person should be allowed to drive.

The causes are of different classification and require different responses. When a cause is systemic it maybe with some natural variance and within what realistically deem acceptable, depending on where we set the bounds. While others maybe special cases and require detailed study to understand. Blindly setting outcome goals without understanding the system is folly.

Sure! The response to someone who is deliberately offensive and someone who habitually offends people by accident should be different, and I don't think anyone denies that. But that's not an argument for doing nothing in response to someone who habitually offends people by accident.

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

#114

Post by phkahler »

AzzieElbab wrote: post #80
toiletfuneral wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah thats me, I don't care about 'intent' as much as 'outcome' All the well meaning in the world doesn't mean shit if you're creating hostility or demeaning others (that is not commentary on RMS, just in general)

I have never in my life seen so much hostility generated by good intentions as we are seeing now during this woke revolution. I repeat - never! And I lived through collapses of two failed states.

>> I have never in my life seen so much hostility generated by good intentions as we are seeing now during this woke revolution.

The "woke" don't actually have good intentions. There are several motivations, but good intent just seems to be an excuse for the hostility you mention.

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

#115

Post by wmf »

ethbr0 wrote: post #98
nostrademons wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Honestly asking, what's the difference between someone being neurodivergent and just thoughtless / mean / an ass?

Whether they can control it?

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

#116

Post by chabad360 »

ethbr0 wrote: post #98
nostrademons wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Honestly asking, what's the difference between someone being neurodivergent and just thoughtless / mean / an ass?

One is someone with a diagnosed mental health disorder(s), and one is just that: an ass.

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

#117

Post by snvzz »

armchairhacker wrote: post #106

Some context I got from https://www.wired.com/story/richard-stallman-and-the-fall-of... : Stallman was pressured to resign from the board and MIT because of some of these controversies: - Jeffrey Epstein coerced one of his victims to have sex with Marvin Minsky. In an online thread, Stallman argued that this might not be sexual assault if Minsky didn't realize she was coerced. - 10 years ago, Stallman claimed that 14…

Here's another review[0] of the events.

[0] https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

A character assassination campaign, and nothing more than that.

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

#118

Post by strictnein »

Traster wrote: post #28
prepend wrote: post #4

Sometimes I worry that we truly are devolving and things are getting worse. I think “eventually people will wise up and focus on what’s important” but then even crazier stuff keeps happening. This is a positive sign that maybe we can figure out how to eventually get it right and it won’t just be a circular firing squad getting smaller and smaller over time.

I just want to chime in to say, either defend Stallman or don’t. Don’t do this silly moral panic “I worry about society” thing. Address the issues, don’t make gross generalisations.

"Only discuss the topic I wish you to discuss" is definitely an interesting take.

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

#119

Post by snvzz »

creamytaco wrote: post #34

Stallman is a bastion of software freedom in a world turning progressively dark. The fact that he never ever compromised his ideals and principles, never sold out and has been repeatedly proven prescient and absolutely on the money on countless issues, makes him someone that we should strive to protect. There are many invididuals in the Free Software world that backstabbed RMS and tried to destroy him with malicious…

The whole deal[0] was a character assassination campaign.

[0] https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

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

#120

Post by stickyricky »

ethbr0 wrote: post #98
nostrademons wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Honestly asking, what's the difference between someone being neurodivergent and just thoughtless / mean / an ass?

One is a personality trait and the other is an anatomical or physiological deviation from normal human development.
Post reply on HN