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

RMS addresses the free software community

fsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 537 posts

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#191

Post by amelius »

javagram wrote: post #109
Zelphyr wrote: post #17

Unrelated but, I'm curious: how does RMS pay the bills? The FSF board seat is a volunteer position and he no longer works for MIT. Is he paid as a consultant or something?

He has given paid talks for the last decade or two I believe. Considering he was sleeping on a mattress in a MIT office, hopefully he saved a good portion of that in a bank account. He will also be eligible for social security and Medicare at his age, assuming he had enough working years in the social security system to qualify.

It's kind of sad given that probably all the FAANG companies wouldn't exist (yet) if it wasn't for his work.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#192

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

solosoyokaze wrote: post #178
rantwasp wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

one thing that bothers me in the context of cancel culture is that it seems people put the equal sign between the work/art someone produces and their ideas outside of that area. Having wrong or plain stupid ideas does not mean you should die and all the [brilliant] work you are doing should go to waste. the bigger the target you attack, the better. right? what is your contribution to this world? they are not even clo…

RMS made these comments on work communication channels. You don't need to separate his ideas from his work because he himself put his ideas into his work environment and is now, correctly, paying the price for that.

I don't think CSAIL mailing list qualifies as "work" for rms, if "work" is FSF. Maybe "professional", but it's a university, so that sort of inquiry is 100% appropriate and should be protected.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#193

Post by NotSammyHagar »

chc wrote: post #139
b215826 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Didn't he write that Epstein's child sex trafficking victim being pimped to septuagenarian professor Marvin Minsky should be considered consensual sex and not rape, despite her attestations otherwise?

Woah, can you provide a citation for that?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#194

Post by DanBC »

zajio1am wrote: post #73
DanBC wrote: post #12

> Some have described me as being "tone-deaf," and that is fair. With my difficulty in understanding social cues, that tends to happen. For instance, I defended Professor Minsky on an M.I.T. mailing list after someone leaped to the conclusion that he was just guilty as Jeffrey Epstein. To my surprise, some thought my message defended Epstein. As I had stated previously, Epstein is a serial rapist, and rapists should…

> In many places this makes Minsky a rapist, whether or not he knew i) she was trafficked or ii) she was coerced or iii) her age. In most places rape, like most crimes, require both actus reus (victim was coerced) and mens rea (perpetrator was aware of that). This is a complicated by the age issue (as a mistake of age is often an explicit exception to mens rea), but in general you cannot be thief, murderer or rapist…

US trafficking laws include the concept of "reckless disregard".

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#195

Post by davexunit »

craigsmansion wrote: post #180
davexunit wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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's a bit rich that you accuse those who didn't take the initial smear campaign at face value of moving the goal posts. First it was the Epstein connection, which proved false. Then it was predatory behaviour at MIT with three quotes from over 3 decades, a sign on his door, and a mattress doused in implications. Then it was simply "making some people uncomfortable", which is sort of a given if you talk about free so…

Until you've been as close to rms as the people that have worked with/for him that have tried and failed for years and years to resolve issues privately, whatever silly argument you are trying to make doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#196

Post by durovo »

philpem wrote: post #158
howeyc wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because having opinions is not something to apologize for.

If your "opinions" hurt people then yes, that is something to apologise for.

This opinion hurts me. Will you apologize now?

EDIT: My phrasing was a bit too aggressive. But I believe that this opinion that people should always apologize if their opinions offend anyone is absurd. People should have the right to be offended. Being offended does not mean that you deserve an apology.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#197

Post by r3856283 »

rbanffy wrote: post #138

It kind of misses the point it was never just about Minsky and Epstein. > 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. Did anyone explain him that he downplayed the role of women in the GNU project? Janis Johnson, Sandra Loosemore, and Dorit Nuzman, to name a few, all did extraordinary w…

> Did he ever correct his statements about no women volunteering to work on GCC?

He wasn't aware of women working on GCC. There's nothing to correct. I'm not aware of women working on GCC. GNU has thousands of people working on it, he's not aware of most of them. So much criticism of him is taking his comments out of context and misrepresenting them, including so many things that are just complete fabrications that it makes it hard to actually understand what "real" problems there are.

> Did anyone ever tell him the Emacs virgins thing is very inappropriate?

Yes, and he agreed and stopped.

> And no, it's not normal for adults to be sexually attracted to teens.

K. You totally lost me there. Ever been to a porn website?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#198

Post by dpbriggs »

chc wrote: post #139
b215826 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Didn't he write that Epstein's child sex trafficking victim being pimped to septuagenarian professor Marvin Minsky should be considered consensual sex and not rape, despite her attestations otherwise?

He didn't write that; it was reported as that.

It wasn't appropriate but RMS being RMS wrote about a situation in which the girls were being coerced into presenting willingly, which Minksy then could have believed.

RMS is technically correct - this scenario could have happened - but I don't believe it as Minsky couldn't have been that naive.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#199

Post by pseudalopex »

geofft wrote: post #136
pseudalopex wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He held a position at MIT until 2019.[1] [1] https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#16_September...

I was at MIT from 2006-11, including as a student researcher at CSAIL from 2007 onwards, and I was on the CSAIL mailing list until I unsubscribed (coincidentally) a week or so before that post. In at least the time that I was at MIT/CSAIL, and to my knowledge thereafter, RMS was not employed by MIT nor was he a student at MIT. He had an email/UNIX account at CSAIL, and he had an office, sponsored by some very senior…

He held a visiting scientist title and an office. The affiliation was less substantial than a professorship but not nothing.
Post reply on HN