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

311–320 of 537 posts

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#311

Post by vidarh »

wavefunction wrote: post #189
rbanffy wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reads as a non-apology. It reads as "I'm sorry my own ways made you feel offended". The right thing to do would be to say "I'm sorry my actions offended you and I will not do that anymore". It'd have been that easy, really. He just doesn't seem to understand that on any level.

He certainly doesn't sound like he intends to change or work to change.

That is an odd take on a message that stresses how he has changed in the past and how he hopes to change from this as well.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#312

Post by pmarin »

stusmall wrote: post #39

"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…

So people without social skills can't not be in leadership positions?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#313

Post by rscoots »

hnbad wrote: post #279
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…

The argument isn't that he contributed nothing or that his contributions are worthless. Few people are advocating for burning everything he built to the ground simply to exorcise his lingering influence once he is gone or whatever and even fewer are doing so in good faith. The argument is that by retaining his position he is actively alienating people. Do you think he is such a phenomenal genius that keeping him is w…

>Do you think he is such a phenomenal genius that keeping him is worth ten good people quitting or not joining in the first place? A hundred? A thousand?

Unless the people at the FSF calling for his ousting are privately acknowledging that this is only because of the 'bottom line' (I don't think that's the case), then it becomes necessary to judge the actual reasoning of those hundred/thousands of people's decision to avoid RMS. Put simply, when is it okay to just implement a blind appeal to popularity?

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#314

Post by prepend »

r3856283 wrote: post #197
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 i…

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

As a father of daughters this stuff is really skeevy to me. But as for “normal,” society has a ways to improve. Remember that Britney Spears became super popular at 16 and 17 and had many fans who were not kids. The first time I saw “Hit Me Baby One More Time” I was in Best Buy and it was showing on the 100 TVs and I remember thinking “What the fuck is this, how old is that poor girl?” And the store, as typical for BestBuy, was full of like 99% adult males.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#315

Post by rscoots »

solosoyokaze wrote: post #304
teddyh wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The age of consent in some European countries is generally lower than the US, some as low as 14, most about 15 with some having 16¹. If we assume that the majority of citizens of such a country agree that their country has a reasonable age, would your response then be to “never associate or work with” anyone from that country? 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age...

I would not work with anyone who held those views, regardless of which country they were from. I find it abhorrent and especially so in the context of work.

But how do we all decide for ourselves what is abhorrent? Hopefully by some sort of reasoning right? (And hopefully not as tortured and ill-advised as what RMS wrote all those years ago.)

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#316

Post by luckylion »

cassepipe wrote: post #126
luckylion wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We the socially inept can and do learn to adapt. He’s a clever man, he can do it too. This is such a weird concept to me. I have no problems getting social cues, it comes natural to me. Doing it purely intellectually? I wouldn't have a fucking idea how to. I think it's similar to doing pretty lame things like walking. It's a complex task that you can only do because you do it automatically. If we had a pill that wo…

I don't understand why you're getting downvotes. Thank you for acknowledging that there are a lot of our mental lives that is not primarily under the control of our reason. I think it opens the discussion to the spectrum of individual psychological variability. A much needed discussion as apparently some people can't fathom how other persons could differ from how they themselves function.

I'm convinced that recognizing that variability will be the next big step. It feels like we're currently between ignorance and fetishizing it. I look forward to the day where it becomes more normal, not only because I find it fascinating, but because I deeply believe that a lot of conflict is based on not understand that other people are fundamentally different from ourselves and then applying our framework to their actions and judging accordingly. I have no idea how we'll arrive at that though.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#317

Post by africanboy »

solosoyokaze wrote: post #293
vorpalhex wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to have a word for defending the accused, "Justice". Accusation by a single terrified and led witness does not give license to treat someone like a convict.

He's not providing "justice", he's tainting open source software. You can read the victim's own thoughts on Stallman: https://twitter.com/VRSVirginia/status/1174108999039406080

what exactly this has to do with what happened to Giuffre and why should we care if it's Giuffre quoting something we have known for years?

Is Giuffre some kind of higher being whose words are to be taken as divine thruths, just because she's a victim of something completely unrelated?

Has Stallman ever did anything remotely similar to a crime?

BTW in my country sex at the age of consent would be considered statutory rape in USA (it's 14 years old here).

Does that make all of us rapers of children?

That was what Stallman was arguing about.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#319

Post by amaccuish »

teddyh wrote: post #292
amaccuish wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He wants to have a discussion about what makes sex between people of varying ages wrong Wtf does that have to do with free software? And why does he keep doing this over and over again? There's no smoke without fire

Why are you so obsessed with RMS? There's no smoke without fire. /s

I'm commenting on an article that made it to the front page and is related to an organisation I deeply care about. Otherwise I wouldn't give RMS the time of day ;)

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#320

Post by solosoyokaze »

africanboy wrote: post #317
solosoyokaze wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not providing "justice", he's tainting open source software. You can read the victim's own thoughts on Stallman: https://twitter.com/VRSVirginia/status/1174108999039406080

what exactly this has to do with what happened to Giuffre and why should we care if it's Giuffre quoting something we have known for years? Is Giuffre some kind of higher being whose words are to be taken as divine thruths, just because she's a victim of something completely unrelated? Has Stallman ever did anything remotely similar to a crime? BTW in my country sex at the age of consent would be considered statutory…

I was responding to the parent comment that claimed Giuffre was a "terrified and led" witness.
Post reply on HN