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

371–380 of 943 posts

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

#371

Post by gameman144 »

wozer wrote: post #333
young_unixer wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even think we should be "advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people". We should just stop using our prejudice to misinterpret statements, and we should stop putting words in other people's mouths. Autistic people (who usually talk in a very literal way) would be benefited by this change as a byproduct, but this principle should apply to everyone, not only to neurodivergent people. Is what the person s…

Unfortunately, that doesn't work either, because there are some neurotypical people who have mastered the art to say technically correct things but implying different, often awful things.

But isn't that a core part of the problem? If I make a statement and you infer something about my intentions, how are you to know if I actually meant to imply that or not? It seems like a constant game of walking on eggshells if you're trying to pre-emptively prevent anyone from concluding that you were trying to imply something bad.

It also seems like this is a largely solved problem in candid one-on-one conversations and interviews: if the other party thinks you're implying something, they can follow-up and ask whether you are indeed intending to. Without two-way discourse, taking someone's statements in good faith seems like the lesser of two evils.

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

#372

Post by austhrow743 »

f1refly wrote: post #335
mdoms wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it ableist to suggest that blind people don't make good air traffic controllers, that paralysed people don't make the best bicycle couriers or that a deaf person is perhaps not a suitable music critic? Everyone works within the limitations of our abilities, and some people are dealt difficult hands - but reality doesn't care about your feelings.

You should try to convince people Beethoven's music sucks because he was deaf. There's really no reason a deaf person can't be great with music.

The context isn't an autistic person being great at people but getting sidelined for the label of autistic so Beethoven seems a bit irrelevant.

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

#373

Post by marcus_holmes »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #125
wmf wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether they can control it?

Then why would someone choose to be an ass - or generally choose to be unlikable?

Some people roll that way. Their childhood (or genes) gave them a personality that enjoys conflict, or that only feels good about themselves if someone else is feeling bad, or enjoys hurting people.

It's most clearly visible in griefers in online games, because the social consequences of griefing are minimal. Some people are just plain nasty.

But I don't think that's what's happening here. And I think it's ridiculous that it's been interpreted this way.

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

#374

Post by Rule35 »

nostrademons wrote: post #41
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 a…

It's the law of maximum outrage. What justifies more third-party outrage victimology? That an ND {of some intersections} was unfairly expected to know the rules, or that a rude {same intersections} was making {some other intersections} uncomfortable.

Harsh truth, but an easy rule for NDs to follow. Anything you say in public will be judged for its potential. If someone can get points for making it sound bad, they will.

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

#375

Post by buisi »

patmcc wrote: post #268
serf wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not really. 'boys will be boys' doesn't assert that 'boys' get away with whatever they want because they are neuro-divergent, it asserts that gender allows for additional privilege. >Just because somebody is different doesn't mean they can be a creep For the sake of argument : what if that person has neurological quirks which disallow 'non-creep' , to use your parlance, behavior? To take the example even further , it…

Take it to the extreme - murder is illegal; if you kill someone because you're a bad bad person, we jail you. If you kill someone because you're "insane"...we still remove you from society, but you just get treatment instead of punishment. We still consider the act of killing someone unacceptable. If swearing at the beach is unacceptable, full stop, then it's unacceptable for a person with or without TS. (Personally,…

They're removed from society to protect society from them. However, depriving someone of their liberty is a pretty extreme step to take, and not one which should be taken lightly.

A TS individual for instance may be annoying, however they aren't causing actual physical harm to other people, in the same sense that a murderer might be.

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

#376

Post by CJefferson »

ddingus wrote: post #235

I am here to say I am pleased to see RMS active in software issues again. I am a fan of his ideas related to software, and his gift to us has paid me and most of my peers off over and over. Tons of others have added to all that and here we are today. Personally, I will consider what he says about software, data, IP. The man is not often wrong. Has a lot to say, and he should be heard. There are other issues, and that…

Genuine question, is there anything useful he has said in the last 10 years he has said you can point to?

He seems helplessly lost in the past, before the web, the explosion in javascript, etc. etc.

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

#377

Post by kelnos »

SilverRed wrote: post #46
JohnHaugeland wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, his post[0] didn't say anything about people of a similar age. His post linked to an article about a Dutch group forming a pro-pedophilia political party that wanted to drop the age of consent to 12, and then eliminate it entirely.

RMS did not (as the parent said) directly argue that pedophilia is ok, but I don't see much distinction between directly arguing that vs. linking to something that does argue that, and him saying he agrees with it.

[0] Not removed; https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun...

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

#378

Post by bryanrasmussen »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #125
wmf wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether they can control it?

Then why would someone choose to be an ass - or generally choose to be unlikable?

making oneself likeable to people one doesn't find particularly likeable themselves is a lot of work, the people who are labeled neurotypical are often jerks to the people who are labeled neuroatypical so why not use one's gifts as a neuroatypical person to be unlikable in return.

on edit: explanatory, not recommending

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

#379

Post by mhh__ »

phkahler wrote: post #114
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.

>> 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.

The vast majority of people you would write off as ""woke"" do have good intentions. There's just a very loud minority just as there are in any political movement.

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

#380

Post by pfortuny »

gruez wrote: post #197
wmf wrote: post #108

For those who do not know RMS personally: "I worked for RMS longer than any other programmer. ... This was an own-goal for RMS. He has had plenty of opportunities to learn how to stfu when that’s necessary. ... I can confirm the unfortunate reality that RMS’s behavior was a concern [in the 1990s], and that [Marvin Minsky's] protection was itself part of the problem. He was never held to account; he was himself coddle…

>and that [Marvin Minsky's] protection was itself part of the problem So if your friend was accused of heinous crime, the right thing to do is to distance yourself as far as possible?

No but justice comes before kindness.
Post reply on HN