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

341–350 of 943 posts

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

#341

Post by cheph »

I think professional conduct has been confused with other things. There is some basic standard of professional conduct that should be adopted in a professional environment. The lack of such a professional conduct is detrimental to the organization and all people who work for it.

This professional conduct is not political correctness, it is not any specific political stance, it is basic things like don't make sexualized remarks, don't make sexual advances, don't ask for personal favours.

If someone can't adhere to these basic standards it is not clear to me why everyone else in a professional environment should be disadvantaged on their part.

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

#342

Post by exikyut »

Aloha wrote: post #330
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…

It's like this, I've spent a lifetime learning a rulebook by trial and error that everyone else just seems to know . It's absolutely maddening when the rules suddenly change for no discernible reason, often with little warning and grave consequences with no second chances for screwing it up. I see people clamoring for a safe spaces and I wonder where I can find such a thing? (To an extent I can find one at sci-fi, an…

What's both practically sad and scientifically ridiculously fascinating is that the cognitive dissonance goes both ways. See also, furry culture representation in general.

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

#343

Post by skissane »

nicklecompte wrote: post #111
subjectsigma wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> For instance, one of those characteristics is having trouble with rhythm. I love the most complicated, fascinating rhythms

One can have no "trouble with rhythm" and yet meet the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for ASD; one can have immense "trouble with rhythm" and yet not meet those criteria – that's because "trouble with rhythm" is not part of the diagnostic criteria, indeed if you read the DSM-5 section on ASD it never even discusses that topic, "trouble with rhythm" simply isn't part of the DSM-5 definition of ASD. At best, it might be seen as an "associated non-diagnostic symptom", something which may occur in some people with ASD (possibly even at a higher rate than in people without ASD); but it is simply a mistake to reason "person X doesn't have symptom Y hence X cannot have ASD" when Y is not a diagnostic symptom.

I don't know whether Stallman has ASD or not, but his conclusion that he doesn't seems to be based on incorrect information. Given that, I don't think we should put much weight on it.

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

#344

Post by teddyh »

nicklecompte wrote: post #76
SilverRed wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way is RMS a bad person? He has always seemed pretty honest and well intentioned. Its just he doesn't know when to shut his mouth or which hills are worth dying on.

I will say his “opinions” on child rape and children with disabilities are despicable and immoral, and not just a matter of him being eccentric. While he might sincerely believe such things that is hardly an endorsement of his character. But it’s not just his horrible opinions: for decades he constantly harassed women at MIT (students and faculty), especially teenagers. The details are really quite gross: https://sel…

> He literally used to have a mattress on the floor of his office. He kept the door to his office open, to proudly showcase that mattress and all the implications that went with it.

There are no implications. Sleeping in your office at MIT is (or at least was) common, as evidenced by this story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24172245

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

#345

Post by kelnos »

sellyme wrote: post #319
danielheath wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the extreme, it totally is. It's important to be right about the important things; it's nice to be right about irrelevant details too, but it's not nearly as important as maintaining a strong network of collaborators.

Maybe I've just been extraordinarily lucky in who I associate with, but no-one I would consider a potential "collaborator" (either in professional or personal life) would ever demand I be incorrect about something to suit their ideals. I've been trying to come up with examples where that might happen and the best one I can think of is someone's young child asked you if Santa was real, but even then I'm about 50/50 on…

Well, that's kinda the thing. If something was in one of those history courses, then they were important enough that it mattered.

Playing into the Santa Claus lie with your friend's kid is absolutely inconsequential to you, but it could mean a lot to that kid (and to the parents) to keep that lie alive a bit longer. (And if telling the truth to that kid, against what the parents would wish, is that important to you, I'd suggest you re-examine your priorities.)

Context matters! Sometimes being right is essential to making some important thing work out. But hey, sometimes being diplomatic (and allowing the other person to be wrong) also can be essential to make some important thing work out. The big thing is knowing the difference and acting appropriately, which is sometimes hard to do in the moment.

But if we're talking about a kid believing in Santa Claus, and the parents actually do care that you keep up the fantasy, you actually are an asshole if you tell the truth, no question. If the parents really don't care, sure, go nuts... though if they didn't care, I'd expect the kid to already know the truth anyway.

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

#346

Post by exikyut »

sterlind wrote: post #337
Aloha wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like this, I've spent a lifetime learning a rulebook by trial and error that everyone else just seems to know . It's absolutely maddening when the rules suddenly change for no discernible reason, often with little warning and grave consequences with no second chances for screwing it up. I see people clamoring for a safe spaces and I wonder where I can find such a thing? (To an extent I can find one at sci-fi, an…

I relate because I've been there, I think. Before I transitioned I had pretty strong ASD and couldn't figure out how to answer simple questions like "what's up?" or if I should wave to someone I've met twice if they're 15 feet away walking towards me. Transitioning did something to my brain chemistry and let me read social cues nearly overnight, but I got friends by delving into the LGBT community. Maybe furry cons i…

Wh...a. Transitioning fixed your social cue perception?!

That is incredibly fascinating. I'm not even sure how to classify that... pragmatic psychological function (oookay that's probably not a thing), neurobiology, or what else.

IMO this is a gigantic breadcrumb for Something™. The question is what the axis point was, and what got fixed as a result. Cooool.

I am very curious what else shifted that you'd be happy to share.

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

#347

Post by doubleunplussed »

tpush wrote: post #89
sebmellen wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!???!

> There goes half of Congress, half of Hollywood, many historic figures, and a fair share of executives. I mean, yeah.

As if the people who replaced them would be any more pure.

Once these are the standards, literally everyone is guilty, and who gets thrown under the bus is a matter of attention rather than guilt.

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

#348

Post by gypsyharlot »

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…

Exactly. Unfortunately, there are activists within the GNU movement, like Andy Wingo, that have done everything they can to have RMS removed from everything he has built.

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

#349

Post by koonsolo »

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 not autistic, and I think RMS statement was 100% rational. If not, then anyone can show me where he is factually wrong.

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

#350

Post by kelnos »

etrabroline wrote: post #129
ethbr0 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

>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.

There's a difference between your perception of someone and what they are actually like.

The asshole is thoughtless because they believe others to be less important than themselves. The person with autism is (may be) thoughtless because their brain isn't wired to be thoughtful. Or they actually are thoughtful, but don't know how to express it in a way that others can understand.

Post reply on HN