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

181–190 of 943 posts

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

#181

Post by microtherion »

ruined wrote: post #17
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…

plenty of autistic people manage to be decent. making excuses like this simply dodges responsibility and assigns bad credit to millions of autistic people who don't deserve it, and amounts to concern trolling.

It's very difficult to generalize over autistic people, because autism encompasses such a wide range of behaviors and abilities. But many people on the autism spectrum seem to have in common that they have (a) below average ability in picking up subtle social cues and (b) above average ability in memorizing and following rules.

In consequence, if RMS is truly on the autism spectrum (I have no idea whether he is), never setting clear boundaries for him may have left him genuinely confused as to what constitutes appropriate behavior, and ultimately did neither him nor his cause any favors.

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

#182

Post by gruez »

ramraj07 wrote: post #110
cambalache wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was he being an actual child-predator, was he sharing child porn? Suppose some guy (Stallman or not) argues that the age of consent should be lowered to 14. Now you are in your right to oppose to that proposal or even be disgusted by it. What you dont have the right to is to silence and ostracize the guy or even suggest that opinion must have any type of consequence , be it legal or moral.

I have the right to attempt to silence or ostracise anyone for anything. Whether or not it’s successful depends on the situation and climate of the world at that time. He has the right to say whatever he wants to say as well. He wasn’t jailed for it just fired for it. Ask him to suck it up and then everyone here can also do the same thing instead of crying a river. Also, please try to show a single example of a perso…

> I have the right to attempt to silence or ostracise anyone for anything. Whether or not it’s successful depends on the situation and climate of the world at that time.

Well, not really. If you try to ostracize someone for being black you'll quickly face legal and/or social sanctions.

>Also, please try to show a single example of a person who defended pedophilia and ended up not being one?

Does expressing skepticism of the scientific basis behind anti-pedophilia laws constitute "defending" pedophilia? Furthermore, if the argument is valid, who cares who's mouth it's coming from? This looks like a lazy attempt to dismiss someone's argument.

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

#183

Post by ttt0 »

Arainach wrote: post #176
ttt0 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty shitty to do this to an actual maintainer, but on the other hand I wish the Linux Foundation started doing this.

Why? Writing a tool - even an operating system kernel - doesn't mean that that tool is appropriate for everything (for instance, for everyday use). Linux does many things great - a fair number of them industry-leading - but desktop user experience is not one of them and has never been close to being so.

Sure, but I still think that the Linux Foundation should represent Linux and not Microsoft.

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

#184

Post by duxup »

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'm wondering how we decide where people who are different are behaving because of that.... or a choice they made that they are responsible for?

I'm not sure how to make that call.

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

#185

Post by preommr »

throwawaycdn12 wrote: post #159
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…

Canada only raised their age of consent from 14 to 16 in 2008. I don't think Canada should be cancelled as a result of this.

+1 We shouldn't be cancelling Canada because of random laws, we should be cancelling them because hockey sucks.

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

#186

Post by SilverRed »

Avshalom wrote: post #172
etrabroline wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>thoughtless / mean / an ass This is precisely what people with autism tend to be like because of the difficulty people with autism have empathizing with others and seeing things from other people's points of view.

I know a lot of autistic people and they're all scrupulously kind and emotionally intelligent. The idea that autistic people are assholes is an artifact of every other gamer on the internet self diagnosing themselves with aspergers in the 00s and then using that as an excuse to be un-introspectively cruel to each other.

Autism is very different for everyone who has it. No one is saying that autistic people are assholes, but that stallman may not see or understand how his comments are taken or why people will get upset when the comment is factually correct.

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

#187

Post by henearkr »

mjg59 wrote: post #179
henearkr wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context is the one of the accusation of Marvin Minsky, in a case involving Epstein. The victim was a 17 yo girl, and "if" the condition of sexual slavery of the victim was not made clear, it could have been misunderstood as a voluntary act, and I would indeed understand that a voluntary sexual act with a 17 yo girl does not systematically lead to harm. What was criticized by RMS was the overly broad generalizatio…

> The context is the one of the accusation of Marvin Minsky, in a case involving Epstein No, the context is the totality of RMS's behaviour over the years, as was made clear by a parent comment: "A few final statements did bring him down, but he had been chipping at the foundation for years."

Right, the context was earlier (2006).

I don't know all of the accumulated missteps he did, so of course I will refrain from concluding. At least, the one about the over-generalization seems legit (with the example of a willing 17 yo).

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

#188

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #156
AzzieElbab wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They may have good intentions, but they lack respect for established norms, and spend little time thinking about the function and purpose of those norms. They kick over Chesterton's fence and assume it was there because Chesterton was some sort -ist: https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/

[deleted]

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

#189

Post by dragonwriter »

henearkr wrote: post #123
JohnHaugeland wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop. He argued that pedophilia was okay.

[edit: I got the context wrong, see children comments] The commented pedophilia was the allegated one of Marvin Minsky with a 17 yo girl, whose coercion (by Epstein) into sexual acts was maybe (probably, in the words of RMS) not made clear to Minsky (nor the age). I precise, because 17 yo is a quite mature age for sexual activity (and more so for a girl than for a boy, because the sexual maturity of the body happens…

> The commented pedophilia was the allegated one of Marvin Minsky with a 17 yo girl,

No, it was a comment in response to a group of Dutch pedophiles forming a political party with the stated goal of first reducing the age of consent for sex to 12, and eventually eliminating it altogether.

What Minsky was accused of is sex with someone post-pubescent but below the age of consent, which isn't an act indicative of pedophilia, so defending pedophilia to defend Minsky would be gratuitous in the same way that defending allowing the Voting Rights Act to expire by saying the practice of slavery in the US wasn't actually harmful to those enslaved would be.

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

#190

Post by henearkr »

dragonwriter wrote: post #189
henearkr wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[edit: I got the context wrong, see children comments] The commented pedophilia was the allegated one of Marvin Minsky with a 17 yo girl, whose coercion (by Epstein) into sexual acts was maybe (probably, in the words of RMS) not made clear to Minsky (nor the age). I precise, because 17 yo is a quite mature age for sexual activity (and more so for a girl than for a boy, because the sexual maturity of the body happens…

> The commented pedophilia was the allegated one of Marvin Minsky with a 17 yo girl, No, it was a comment in response to a group of Dutch pedophiles forming a political party with the stated goal of first reducing the age of consent for sex to 12, and eventually eliminating it altogether. What Minsky was accused of is sex with someone post-pubescent but below the age of consent, which isn't an act indicative of pedop…

Oh, thanks for pointing out. You're right, so the Minsky case does not belong to the controversy around RMS positions.

I did not know of this Dutch group, and I think their purpose is wrong.

Post reply on HN