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

851–860 of 943 posts

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

#851

Post by RangerNS »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #254
themacguffinman wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of an ideological project (or any project, really) is to try and get everyone pulling in the same direction. GNU/FSF is an organization for one specific ideal: free software. It's not intended as a vehicle for any random ideal people care about.

>It's not intended as a vehicle for any random ideal people care about. Who used it like that? Stallman's comments happened outside the organization, the tweet was from someone I think unrelated to the project. I can understand keeping other ideals out of the project, but in context you're telling people not to express other ideals.

... in the name of the organization.

And RMS's "pleasure cards" listing his office address and organizational email certainly indicate that his private activities are the organizations activities.

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

#852

Post by visitor1 »

prepend wrote: post #551
dragonwriter wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> someone post-pubescent but below the age of consent I think an adult having sexual acts with a minor is not good because of the power imbalance. At the time of the act, the age of consent in that jurisdiction was 16 [0], so the person was not below the age of consent. It has since been changed to 18. I’m not agreeing with having a low age of consent, but since that’s a legal term, I’m posting this just to help you…

It has since been changed to 18.

Could you provide some source as to when the age of consent was changed from 16 to 18 in the US Virgin Island? That would be really illuminating! A link to the Act, an article, something? I haven't been able to find any.

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

#853

Post by [deleted] »

prepend wrote: post #551
dragonwriter wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> someone post-pubescent but below the age of consent I think an adult having sexual acts with a minor is not good because of the power imbalance. At the time of the act, the age of consent in that jurisdiction was 16 [0], so the person was not below the age of consent. It has since been changed to 18. I’m not agreeing with having a low age of consent, but since that’s a legal term, I’m posting this just to help you…

[deleted]

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

#854

Post by buisi »

JohnBooty wrote: post #802
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just fundamentally reject the equivalence between “hurt” and “uncomfortable”. The idea that people have a moral obligation to be normal, that I’ve been injured when someone acts weird or offers distasteful opinions, could come straight out of a Moral Majority handbook. It only makes sense from within a strict monoculture, where everyone feels obligated to conform and confident that the things they have to conform w…

This is not about a strict monoculture. You can have a robust and diverse culture in which there's broad agreement that a few things are bad - murder, slavery, sex with minors, etc. RMS defended Minsky's sex with a minor and perhaps more relevantly if we read the linked articles, it's part of a longstanding trend with him. And he feels the need to push these views on others in a workplace/academic setting, via mailin…

To be fair, he voiced most of his opinions on his personal blog, and not on the mailing list.

His personal blog is presumably a place which you would peruse, if you wanted to know what his personal views on things are, and it was so obscure that seemingly no one knew of it until someone really went digging.

Not only that, but he didn't even make these views with any particular frequency. One was made in 2006. Another six years later. So, a couple of comments he casually tossed out over decades, in a place where he would have expected few to ever see it.

To be clear, I don't agree with many of his opinions (some suggest he might have worded his opinions really, really badly, and might mean something else), although I agree with one original blog post he referenced, where child porn laws have become so stretched they're being applied in places they were never originally intended to be.

Like someone recording evidence to provide to the police of their children behaving in an overtly sexual manner which could be an indicator of abuse, arresting someone for a drawing which is a serious waste of police resources, the risk that someone can't reference historical images like the one from Vietnam, and so on.

On the mailing list, he responded in a literal fashion taking the premise that Minsky had been misled. Unfortunately, it was poorly worded. If he had simply said that, rather than going on about her "presenting herself", or the other utterances, then it wouldn't even be a story.

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

#855

Post by nobody9999 »

pseudalopex wrote: post #790
nobody9999 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even if he did, there is nothing about autism that compels you to try and legitimize child sexual offenders. Where, exactly , did RMS do so? This isn't a troll or a "gotcha" either. All the claims about RMS doing so are from now public statements by RMS. Please provide (with appropriate context) evidence for the assertion that RMS tried to "legitimize child sexual offenders." If you perform that exercise in good fai…

Stallman said pedophilia is "illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness".[1] He must have meant the act because the paraphilia isn't illegal. He dismissed people who believe children can't consent as "parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing".[2] He didn't mean adolescents.[3] Having sex with a child is an offense in most countries.[4] Offender means someone who commits an…

You have ignored and omitted context from each of the statements you linked above.

And so I can only assume you're not posting in good faith. That's sad, as it's something I really like about HN.

I had responded in detail to each of the claims you made and expounded on the fact that age of consent is wildly different in all those countries you mention. Sadly, it was all lost with a -w[1] in Firefox.

In fact, in 20 US states, there is no lower limit on the age of marriage[0], which explicitly allows sexual activity.

I don't expect anything from you. I'm just disappointed in the (I can only assume deliberate) way you omitted and distorted Stallman's statements to suit your point of view. That's sad.

[0] https://www.equalitynow.org/learn_more_child_marriage_us

[1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1238895

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

#856

Post by shagie »

zucker42 wrote: post #784
nrclark wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that this opinion is controversial - but I think GPLv3 really hurt GNU a lot. And that license was 100% RMS's doing, as well as the decision to force it onto most/all GNU projects. GPLv3 basically forced the embedded Linux community to dump the GNU userspace in favor of Busybox. That's a lot of active developers who stopped using and contributing to Bash, Coreutils, and a whole host of other projects. RMS prop…

Why did GPLv3 force the embedded Linux community to drop GNU?

Linus on GPLv3: https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU

He really doesn't like it.

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

#857

Post by owl57 »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #844
owl57 wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would seem logical. I was alien enough to boys to land at the "girls table" in school canteen when I was 11. Pieces of experience like this could probably help to start considering the possibility.

This is an extremely dangerous and absolutely insane line of reasoning that is causing incredible harm to young people. You don’t have gender dysphoria because you hung out with girls as an 11 year old.

No. I actually don't know a real thing about gender dysphoria. I just presumed that if you look square and feel round, you are more likely to recognize and embrace your roundness if your other traits make society less consistent in squeezing you into square holes.

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

#858

Post by boomboomsubban »

RangerNS wrote: post #851
boomboomsubban wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's not intended as a vehicle for any random ideal people care about. Who used it like that? Stallman's comments happened outside the organization, the tweet was from someone I think unrelated to the project. I can understand keeping other ideals out of the project, but in context you're telling people not to express other ideals.

... in the name of the organization. And RMS's "pleasure cards" listing his office address and organizational email certainly indicate that his private activities are the organizations activities.

Yes, he should have been reprimanded for using the organization's name to make a bad joke seemingly decades ago.

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

#859

Post by notananthem »

He can continue broadcasting being an asshole with shitty views, but if he also serves on a board of directors (exec director or not) that board and the organizations it represents and partners with are now all broadcasting a distilled, more virulent form of that message. Its not cancel culture its just his fucking time.

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

#860

Post by eyelidlessness »

Aloha wrote: post #326
eyelidlessness wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re honestly asking, it’s a rude question as stated. But if you’re sincerely admitting you don’t understand the difference, the difference is this: Many people (including myself) have difficulty with certain social cues and expectations. Many of us can be offputting or come off as overly direct or disrespectful. Where we diverge is when and how we address that fact. Do we (only) lash out and expect the world to…

Agreed. I've spent a lifetime learning a rulebook by trial and error that everyone else just seems to know . It's absolutely maddening then the rules suddenly change for no discernible reason, often with little warning and grave consequences with no second chances for screwing it up.

I’m sorry I didn’t see this sooner. Just want to say I’ve felt this, most of my life. I wish I had more to offer than this but: you’re not alone, and I hope knowing that will be as helpful to you as it’s been to me.
Post reply on HN