Live data from Hacker News

RMS addresses the free software community

fsf.org

141–150 of 537 posts

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#141
post #69
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologize for what? This post doesn't make him less accountable for what he wrote in that email.

It may have come across as being insensitive, but what he wrote in that email wasn't technically wrong.

Being correct is entirely orthogonal to being appropriate.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#142
post #49

The Minsky defense was not the primary, most important reason RMS can't serve as an effective, inclusive leader for free software, it was just the one that got the most attention. This does nothing to address the numerous complaints of harassment towards MIT students, the _other_ times he spoke out in implicit support of pedophilia, the public gaffes that are unacceptable as a public representative (e.g. the foot ski…

He's mistreated many FSF staff members, many LibrePlanet attendees, many GNU project contributors, etc. The fact that the public discourse is focused on the Epstein-related comments does RMS and the FSF a huge favor by pointing the spotlight away from the real issue which has been happening for decades .

It makes painfully obvious the point they don't get it. They really, willingly or not, refuse to understand what the issues here are.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#143
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These social skills are crucial in this role. Absolutely not. He is a theorist (if not the theorist) of Free Software. His role is paramount, he is literally the only human completely implacable regarding the degrees of freedom that should be guaranteed to algorithms and software. The whole movement he started has as well spurred the Creative Commons movement, that is an application to the same principles more spec…

But what does that have to do with running the FSF day to day?

The FSF ran just fine under him before the Selam G. shitstorm. Sure, he irked a lot of people with his rigid stances. But considering how those stances are exactly what made him found the FSF in the first place, I don't see it as a big problem.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#144
post #66

So what will mozilla say now? Are they proud of essentially bullying a man who has a disability?

Apparently, in (class/identity) wars there are no innocents, personal circumstances don't matter, what matters is to support your ideology by any means. Like good little soldiers, they should execute and not think, they are not allowed to have original ideas. When they become too original they instantly are labelled heretics and cancelled. So they can't stop and look at circumstances when the purity spiral is crushin…

Yes. The only thing that matters is the quantity of retweets your morally righteous attitudes afford you

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#145
post #114

RMS is a statutory rape apologist, and a defender of a pedophile. As well as making young women creeped out with unwanted advances. Is this who we want to glorify?

This is possibly not a fitting reply but your comment reads like satire to me, in all honesty. Both your claims in your first phrase I believe are wholly incorrect and could only originate from an out-of-context, accusatory source such as some articles linked in this thread that could not be more obviously manufactured to frame a very specific and offending perspective on a —ridiculously enough— discourse over semant…

I have read both RMS’ own statements on age of consent, I have read his statements defending minsky(s/p), and I’ve read firsthand accounts of students creeped out by his advances. None of those are acceptable for a person in a powerful position.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#146
post #105

That's great, but the problem seems to be RMS's disruption of development activities. This doesn't change that. For example: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-01/msg00... Imagine taking the time to publicly explain to an out-of-practice dev why some technical feature is needed, then being accused of a "pressure campaign" that requires the out-of-practice dev to consult privately, "with people I have…

Someone I know who works on pretty much singlehandedly on something that is on the frontpage of GCC said that he entered Stallman's bad books the moment he found out he had children. GCC plugins were a stallman thing, LLVM was even offered to the FSF at one point IIRC. Is there anything competent he has done post-2000 or so?

> Stallman's bad books the moment he found out he had children.

This is how disparaging internet rumors are spread. You know someone that allegedly experienced this. Do you know them well enough to know the account is factual, or maybe they were just piling on because they had a bad experience with him and decided to frame him in this negative way because it was the 'cool' thing to do at the time?

Quit proliferating unsourced 3rd party accounts.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#147

RMS is a statutory rape apologist, and a defender of a pedophile. As well as making young women creeped out with unwanted advances. Is this who we want to glorify?

> RMS is a statutory rape apologist, and a defender of a pedophile. Wasn't the entire point of his post to refute this interpretation of what happened? Does no one else notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I reject his explanation. Plain and simple. I have read RMS’ own statements I have read firsthand accounts of his victims. I formed my own opinion.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#148

"Later in life, I discovered that some people had negative reactions to my behavior, which I did not even know about. Tending to be direct and honest with my thoughts, I sometimes made others uncomfortable or even offended them -- especially women. This was not a choice: I didn't understand the problem enough to know which choices there were. Sometimes I lost my temper because I didn't have the social skills to avoid…

I agree rms is unfit to be a leader, but as a member of the FSF board he is fit to give his opinion on what GPLv4 should be if it ever gets released. I'm trust FSF to do the right thing on "or later" licenses if rms is onboard, but when I see Red Hat removing funding to get him out of the board, well, this give me pause. https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hat-statement-about-richa...

Why would Red Hat want to be associated with a group that quietly reinstates him? The board that did it should also go.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#149
post #105

That's great, but the problem seems to be RMS's disruption of development activities. This doesn't change that. For example: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-01/msg00... Imagine taking the time to publicly explain to an out-of-practice dev why some technical feature is needed, then being accused of a "pressure campaign" that requires the out-of-practice dev to consult privately, "with people I have…

Someone I know who works on pretty much singlehandedly on something that is on the frontpage of GCC said that he entered Stallman's bad books the moment he found out he had children. GCC plugins were a stallman thing, LLVM was even offered to the FSF at one point IIRC. Is there anything competent he has done post-2000 or so?

> Someone I know who works on pretty much singlehandedly on something that is on the frontpage of GCC said that he entered Stallman's bad books the moment he found out he had children.

I know pretty much nothing about this Stallman person, does he actually dislike people with children?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#150

"Later in life, I discovered that some people had negative reactions to my behavior, which I did not even know about. Tending to be direct and honest with my thoughts, I sometimes made others uncomfortable or even offended them -- especially women. This was not a choice: I didn't understand the problem enough to know which choices there were. Sometimes I lost my temper because I didn't have the social skills to avoid…

I agree rms is unfit to be a leader, but as a member of the FSF board he is fit to give his opinion on what GPLv4 should be if it ever gets released. I'm trust FSF to do the right thing on "or later" licenses if rms is onboard, but when I see Red Hat removing funding to get him out of the board, well, this give me pause. https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hat-statement-about-richa...

If you look at the FSF's 990, you will see that the Red Hat contribution amounted to about $7000 USD a year. It was a really negligible amount.
Post reply on HN