By all means let them sponsor open source events, we’ll just take the benefits. If that means listening to their latest swindle then so be it, small price to pay. Isn’t this what the phrase “useful idiots” was invented for?
No Billionares at FOSDEM
11–20 of 213 posts
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#12[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#13I have no opinion on the sit-in, but it is always hilarious to see ex-Twitterites breathlessly bemoaning the sale, as if massive centralized ad-based networks feeding algorithmically presented "content" to the masses are somehow a boon to society as long as they are owned by a "good guy".
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
He isn't boycotting. He is planning to peacefully protest, which I think is reasonable.
Why is it reasonable to interrupt everyone else's freedom to hear someone talk?
If you believe someone is actively harming the audience (as he seems to), a peaceful protest is the way to go.
We'll learn soon enough if he is right and the community stands (sits?) with him or not.
But I couldn't not giggle on "freedom to hear someone talk" as an inverse of "free speech". Jack Dorsey has many platforms where he is welcome, and there are plenty opportunities to hear him share his thoughts. It's not like someone on the fringes is being shut off.
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#15I don't know how someone could look at Dorsey/Musk/Bezos actions and still be interested in what they have to say. There's probably a lot to be learned from someone who worships money, assuming that your goal is to emulate them.
However their lifestyle and ideology is inherently dangerous to workers and life on earth as we know it. So yeah I don't really care what they have to say beyond knowing how the enemy views the average citizen (hint: it's not very positively).
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#16[flagged]
I think this is not a charitable take. The writing is balanced and he highlights that this is his subjective opinion and preference. Your comment is hyperbole and blows the whole thing out of proportion.
He highlights that this is his subjective opinion and preference right before announcing that he’s going to try and stop the talk from happening by sitting down on the stage. I think this is an extraordinarily rude thing to do at a volunteer led event and really demands a better justification than subjective dislike.
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#17[flagged]
No
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#18[flagged]
He isn't boycotting. He is planning to peacefully protest, which I think is reasonable.
>> He isn't boycotting. He is planning to peacefully protest, which I think is reasonable.
No. He's planning to forcefully disrupt by blocking the stage. Narcissistic to the core: "My views and need for attention are more important than the other 8000 people here who may want to see this talk."
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#19[flagged]
From your POV yes. But obviously not from Drew's POV.
Now that we established everyone have different POV and a sense of what is right and wrong how do we proceed from here?
Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM
#20[flagged]
From your POV yes. But obviously not from Drew's POV. Now that we established everyone have different POV and a sense of what is right and wrong how do we proceed from here?
By listening to different points of view and deciding what best makes sense to us. That is why suppressing speech(es) is wrong.