Live data from Hacker News

RMS addresses the free software community

fsf.org

431–440 of 537 posts

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You make it sound like only RMS' contributions were significant for our current state of software. There are a lot of people with significant contributions without which the world wouldn't be in its current state.

Yes, but RMS seems to be at the root of it all.

For example, Linux depends on gcc and binutils and other GNU software, and many other software does.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#432
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…

I don't recall it ever having been proven that Minksy had sex with anyone. I'm obviously open to being corrected on this.

We're not talking about what Minsky did or did not do. We're talking about the situation that Stallman set up, and then defended. In Stallman's version Minsky did have sex with a coerced trafficked 17 year old, and Stallman is fine with that happening.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> people that have worked with/for him that have tried and failed for years and years to resolve issues privately Is this about Thomas Bushnell? Because I feel this is about Thomas Bushnell[1]. Bushnell is currently a friar in a religious order and works for google, and there is nothing wrong with that[2] . I can easily work with devout religious people and respect and accept them for their superior knowledge of the…

No it's not about that person. This isn't about RMS saying something that some of us disagree with and looking past it. It's much bigger than that. For example, RMS made the working environment at the FSF so bad that the staff unionized. The working environment is still bad (staff either burn out trying to make things better or get fired for some reason) but at least RMS can't fire people on a whim and the staff get bereavement leave (RMS was opposed to it) and cost of living pay adjustments (also opposed).

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being correct is entirely orthogonal to being appropriate.

Appropriate or not, it was the truth, and whether people feel like hearing it or not, the truth is always justified in standing up for.

I disagree. There are plenty of instances where a truthful statement isn’t worth standing up for. For example: statements that are unimportant, irrelevant, inconsequential, etc, in the context of the broader situation.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#435
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 movem…

I appreciate your thoughtful reply. I think the problem in it with respect to mine lies here: "because the relevant society has decided that it is obvious why sex with minors is harmful" But it's not obvious who is a minor or when a minor having sex is wrong. I commented elsewhere, but what about two 15 year olds? A 15 and a 20? In some country X where age of consent is 14, vs. in some country Y where age of consent…

That was the question RMS asked, but it is oblivious of a way more relevant point: the girl was a victim of human trafficking. Regardless of age a sex slave cannot consent.

Not to mention how clueless you have to be to discuss age of consent laws on a many-thousand person workplace mailing list with teenagers on it.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#436
post #50

This is not an apology.

Correct. It's an address. I don't think anyone was expecting an apology, they were demanding a complete resignation of the entire board of the FSF.

People were not wanting an apology to forgive someone afterwards. They were demanding total capitulation. Peace was not on the table.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#437
The misinformation goes on. Susan Boos, president of the Swiss Press Council (!) writes:

https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/amp/meinung/gastkommentar-ric...

"Es ging um unterschiedliche sexistische Übergriffe. An seiner Bürotür stand «Ritter für Gerechtigkeit (auch: heisse Ladies)»."

"The topic were various sexual assaults. On his office door there was a sign «knight for justice (also: hot ladies)»."

This has been debunked multiple times, in fact the photo shows it was most likely students making a joke:

https://www.stallmansupport.org/say-it-with-a-meme.html#door

Way to go, Swiss "Press Council" ...

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#438
post #66

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

Mozilla will of course follow their own code of conduct and those of the organisations they belong to. (Except when they are part of the mob)

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#439

Reading this breaks my heart a little. Having the humility to bow to the people that harassed him and the FSF is a gesture I wasn't really expecting from him. However it's refreshing to see that people that are consistently seen as abrasive and negative, can introspect, even due to external circumstances, and try to correct their behaviour so late in life. I feel like online we need to try to empathize a lot more wit…

I think it would be fairer to say that RMS needs to introspect, because the way his brain works, all those little things which seem to be automatic for other people require constant conscious effort. I sometimes feel the same way; that in order to not cause disruption in social situations, I need to engage my conscious brain at 100% and monitor my actions (and other people's) because if I don't, I might communicate s…

> "I sometimes feel the same way; that in order to not cause disruption in social situations, I need to engage my conscious brain at 100% and monitor my actions (and other people's) because if I don't, I might communicate something in a way that another person will misinterpret and which then leads to trouble."

You can relax a bit. Because what you're missing is that 75% of people just don't even think of being careful like this and are fine with frequently coming across poorly to other people. You're just introspecting more and being polite, as I think is usually better and respectful.

Re: RMS addresses the free software community

#440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

she could be, we don't know (at least I don't know) and since I don't know, I prefer to stay on the cautious side. For example Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has now sued the woman in federal court in New York, claiming that her allegations are “lies, disparagement, defamation, harassment” that are “beyond the bounds of decency and not tolerated in civilized society.” [...] Dershowitz repeated his previous cla…

As someone who has followed the case closely, I have no problem saying I believe Giuffre. She's hardly the only Epstein victim and there's plenty of photo evidence backing up many of her other claims.

who said anything about Epstein?

I believe Epstein did it, Stallam believes Epstein did it too (he wrote it in the thread), there's no doubt about it.

Another thing entirely is the other accusations, we can't assume that every accusation is true until proven otherwise by a court of the law (except for Minsky who's dead).

That's why I support Stallman reasoning, a chain of criminal events can't be assumed on someone's saying, it must be proven or we go back to inquisition, especially if one of the accused is dead, can't defend himslef and it's the smallest fish in the pond.

I get these are all powerful men and have the means to protect themselves, but they have the right to be presumed innocent nonetheless.

Having followed the case myself, I wonder why nobody is talking about Wexner, former CEO of the Victoria's secret empire that was built thanks to the close friendhsip with Epstein and who's still on an honorary president's chair.

> L Brands executives were reportedly made aware, in the mid-1990s, that Epstein was posing as a modeling recruiter for the company. Although they alerted Wexner, he seems to have taken no action

An why Boies talked to Wexner (they now say it was his lawyer) and forced the judge to remove him and after the court removed Boies and his team Giuffre hired his opponent in the gay marriage trial that made Boies popular?

> Boies and his entire team from Boies Schiller Flexner were removed from the New York case in October after judge Loretta Preska determined that he had become a witness in the suit and, as such, could no longer advocate on Giuffre’s behalf.

> Charles J. Cooper replaced David Boies, his opponent in a California gay marriage case argued before the Supreme Court, as a lawyer for Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her federal defamation lawsuit against Dershowitz.

The case is now an O.J. Simpson scale event, I think we will know more only after the next hearings.

I am simply being cautious, I am not dismissing Giuffre, in my opinion things are too complicated to throw judgements around, one way or the other (except, as we have established, for Epstein).

I also don't believe Wexner can be the only Epstein's client.

If we look at the case in its entirety, what Stallman did or didn't do it's meaningless.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article245017...

(sorry for the late answer, I was rate limited)

Post reply on HN