Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

meribold.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 274 posts

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#41

Post by lyu07282 »

> RMS has (for some reason) tens of thousands of political notes on his website ready to be cherry-picked

That would give me literally nightmares, I really don't understand people who write their opinions online (or sharing or liking of other peoples opinions) using their real name. It seems incredibly foolish. Even if you think you are woke enough, chances of getting cancelled in the future seem very high.

I have this fear that I won't be able to find a job in the future because my absence online will be viewed with deep suspicion.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#42

Post by sokoloff »

johannes1234321 wrote: post #13
vmception wrote: post #6

Ok I’m missing a key part of this: Why should I care about this recurring drama? Is the leadership of the FSF even important? I’ve gone my whole life without needing to follow board composition of the FSF.

A reason: Lots of software is licensed under "GPL V2, or newer" or "GPL v3, or newer" The Free Software Foundation can release a new version of that license, which will relicense all those works under those new terms.

As I read it, users will still have the option to choose the existing concrete license (ignoring “or later”), so if V4 became a restrictive license somehow, “V2 or later” is no more restrictive for users who don’t want it to be.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#43

Post by simion314 »

yur3i__ wrote: post #4

As much as I like rms, I find it very difficult to move past his comments on child pornography[1]. [1] https://stallman.org/notes/2011-mar-jun.html#4_June_2011_(Bo...

I don't agree with him but he always has a mathematical way of thinking about things, using logic. In contrast with others that are the reverse, they assume that porn/violent video games, other legal stuff might have an effect so then they argue only based on assumption on removing freedoms. So personally I think when we want to remove a freedom we try our best to prove that we are doing something that has a significant good effect(I am speaking in general).

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#44

Post by lolc »

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #9

RMS is a terrible spokesperson for free software. I wish the FSF could just fire him and move on. How do I know he's a terrible spokesperson? Because we're talking about him and not about free software. It's that simple. I want the FSF to focus on free software and I want the discourse around the FSF to be about free software. Not RMS.

> Because we're talking about him and not about free software. It's that simple.

No it's not that simple. Because the other side of this is that we are talking about Free Software because of him, indluding his personality. Few people would stand up for this thankless job. Few people would have created and promoted the GPL.

We are taling about RMS because some people decided to attack him unfairly. There may be people better suited for the job. But that is a different argument from the one you made.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#45

Post by pydry »

vmception wrote: post #6

Ok I’m missing a key part of this: Why should I care about this recurring drama? Is the leadership of the FSF even important? I’ve gone my whole life without needing to follow board composition of the FSF.

A principled head of the FSF is bad for corporate profit margins but good for anybody else who participates in the free software ecosystem.

There are quite a lot of powerful people who would like to see it water down its principles. Thats a lot easier without Stallman.

I don't for a second believe that this is actually about what RMS said. This scandal has corporate PR fingerprints all over it.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#46

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

simion314 wrote: post #36

I am afraid to put my name/email/github id in support of RMS because some mob in future will draw incorrect equivalence with whatever they want like "you support RMS then you are an X " where X seems to be a pedo. I am also wondering how many GNU/FSF haters are participating in just because they prefer MIT/BSD and see GNU as a cancer eating at their money making scheme.

> I am afraid to put my name/email/github id in support of RMS because some mob in future ...

That's exactly what these totalitarian wokists aim for: to make people afraid to oppose them. The only way to stop it is not cave in to their absurd demands. Be strong, live without fear, and do the right thing.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#47

Post by propertymagnate »

spoonjim wrote: post #10
vmception wrote: post #6

Ok I’m missing a key part of this: Why should I care about this recurring drama? Is the leadership of the FSF even important? I’ve gone my whole life without needing to follow board composition of the FSF.

Having a party on your “side” of an opinion spectrum that is very extreme — like the FSF under Stallman - is important for maintaining the Overton window of acceptability where you want it. If you want the minimum wage raised to $10, Bernie Sanders arguing for $15, and bringing people into that worldview, helps you. Such has been the FSF for open source especially in its nascent days with corporate interests still th…

Great comment - the extremes of the overton window determine what is acceptable as the middle. And the middle is crucial, as we are, as people, almost always framing issues as having two sides, and compromising to something in that middle.

Without one of those extremes including your own position or including it and being further left/right, no compromise will ever happen that includes what you want.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#48

Post by KingOfCoders »

Toutouxc wrote: post #34
yur3i__ wrote: post #4

As much as I like rms, I find it very difficult to move past his comments on child pornography[1]. [1] https://stallman.org/notes/2011-mar-jun.html#4_June_2011_(Bo...

I don't find it difficult at all, because the way he sees it, what he says is strictly logically true. Possession of CP material does not hurt anyone. The fact that people who want to possess (and are willing to pay for) CP material are a huge reason for CP material to be created by whatever means available (that's the part that hurts people) seems to be lost on him. His ideas on free software and freedom in general…

Me having kicked you doesn't hurt anyone - the act of kicking you does hurt. So after I have kicked you, and you no longer feel pain, no harm done? I'm stealing your lunch and the next day you have a new lunch and are no longer hungry, no harm done?

I think the act can't be seperated from the result - this is were people go wrong.

Re: A Critique of the Open Letter Calling for the Removal of RMS

#50

Post by mavhc »

why_Mr_Anderson wrote: post #22
AndyMcConachie wrote: post #9

RMS is a terrible spokesperson for free software. I wish the FSF could just fire him and move on. How do I know he's a terrible spokesperson? Because we're talking about him and not about free software. It's that simple. I want the FSF to focus on free software and I want the discourse around the FSF to be about free software. Not RMS.

But RMS is one of the main reasons why there is any free software in first place. Without his obsession, it would be long destroyed.

Wernher von Braun is one of the main reasons why there is any space flight in the first place, without his obsession it would be much delayed.

Doesn't make him a good person to lead NASA

Post reply on HN