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

261–270 of 537 posts

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#261

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #238
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not FSF's site that I know of, but there's mentions of these "consensual pedo" stuff on his blog. As he's a visible spokesperson, that means his blog content is part of his overall role, and not something that can be treated in isolation. I'd also push back on the post further up: It's not a particularly interesting philosophical question, and I don't think pure inquiry is RMS's goal here given his tendency to aggres…

"As he's a visible spokesperson, that means his blog content is part of his overall role, and not something that can be treated in isolation." I agree this is de facto the case. It's kind of sad, though, and I don't think the world needs to be this way. There should be a way for an e.g. CEO or similar to have a life and persona outside of a job.

There are various ways to do that. Plenty of famous people manage to figure it out. That's not what RMS was after. He's putting this stuff up on his blog, which he uses for activism, not abstract philosophical inquiry.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#262

Post by WesolyKubeczek »

solosoyokaze wrote: post #219
NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Are you comparing the rape of a minor to homosexuality?" Yes, that's exactly it. Respectable people would have felt the same way about homosexuality 100 years ago as you do about sex involving minors. Further, your characterization as "rape of a minor" is problematic. What's a minor? If one minor is involved, it automatically becomes rape? In much of Europe ages of consent are surprisingly low (14) to Americans, who…

I would absolutely not work with someone who held these views. Unprofessional, disturbing and illegal.

Why do you even think working with you would be sought after?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#263

Post by stonogo »

It's disgusting that the FSF not only snuck the return of RMS into the end of LibrePlanet without notifying anyone, drove out the wrongthinking staff before creating a staff position on the board, and now to cap it off are writing articles instructing people on how to react to these things.

RMS is not a good leader. The FSF should pay him for his work on GPL and leave him off the board. The FSF should also stop writing instructions for other people on how to treat the FSF, and should instead focus on earning the response they want to see from their supporters.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#264

Post by rvz »

imwillofficial wrote: post #147
TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

So no point in 'apologies' of any sort. Let the cancellations continue and the medieval mob run wild over any letter spoken by this being.

Oh dear.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#265

Post by Osmose »

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #108
Osmose wrote: 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 has been treated unfairly many times and that is, completely independent of whether he's the best choice as leader for the FSF, wrong. You do it here: "the _other_times he spoke out in implicit support of pedophilia...". He wants to have a discussion about what makes sex between people of varying ages wrong. He applies normative principles to it and can't see why it's wrong (e.g., age of consent varies...why would…

> completely independent of whether he's the best choice as leader for the FSF

It's not independent, you can't just drop the context. RMS the 9-5 software dev at some nameless corporation having this discussion is, while still unacceptable (because the relevant society has decided that it is obvious why sex with minors is harmful), not nearly as impactful as RMS the respected-by-many leader of the free software movement. The clout he has from that position and work makes him influential even outside of the sphere, as well as affecting people who might join the movement but are pushed away because they find his other opinions unacceptable.

That's why we're talking about it in this comment thread instead of ignoring it like we do most of the weird takes on the internet.

> I'm also not sure why "inclusive" is a good criterion for FSF leader, it seems like just a hollow shibboleth buzzword at this point. People who harp on "inclusion" are usually the most interested in exclusion.

The paradox of tolerance explains why it might feel like being inclusive of many groups of people involves exclusion.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#266

Post by pseudalopex »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #28

It's good that he acknowledges his comments hurt people. It's good that he is pledging to do better. I think as far as apologies go, this one ticks most of the boxes as far as admitting personal fault and not using weasel-words to blame the victims or apologize "if you were offended." With all that said, I don't think this is going to bring any of the lost sponsors back.

It's less a pledge to do better and more an assertion he puts adequate effort into improving already.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#268

Post by Udik »

jraph wrote: post #246
Udik wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> almost as dishonest, even if it's not saying he defended Epstein: "Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'". Why "almost"? It's false, and clearly so for anyone who has the literacy needed to write that piece. It's entirely dishonest.

Did you read "almost as dishonest" as "almost dishonest"?

No, I read it as "somewhat less dishonest". But since anyone who is able to read and understand English at a high school level knows that "presented herself as entirely willing" means something different from "was entirely willing", both statements ("defends Epstein" and "says she was entirely willing") are deliberately stating complete falsehoods. Which is entirely dishonest.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#269

Post by bogwog »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #149
mhh__ wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's important to keep in mind that RMS is a controversial figure, and a lot of people disagree with the FSF mission/philosophy. So, naturally, you're going to see a lot of baseless rumors from anonymous assholes on the internet.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#270

Post by solosoyokaze »

Phelinofist wrote: post #255
solosoyokaze wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it does. It claims the allegations against Minsky are false. That has not been proven and the allegations are highly credible. It's an offensive and stupid thing to say, especially publicly, especially when you're "apologizing".

Innocent until proven guilty? The accusation were neither proven to be true, so what is up with your really flawed reasoning?

The ability to be an effective leader is not a court of law. I'm totally ok calling for someone to step down after they defend statutory rape, in theory and practice (which RMS did both).
Post reply on HN